Dear Editor,
Permit me to respond to a letter published by the Stabroek News on September 4, 2012, and written by Cindy Sookdeo, in respect of statements I made in the recently aired in the NCN debate series in respect of former President Bharrat Jagdeo‘s pensions (‘The evidence shows that former President Jagdeo got preferential treatment for Pradoville II land’).
In the letter, Ms Sookdeo, whom I understand to be an executive member of the Alliance for Change (AFC), contends that Mr Jagdeo received “preferential treatment” in so far as he was allowed to sell a plot of land purchased from the government, which was the subject of a prohibition against such sale.
I have clarified this matter, publicly, two years ago. I will do so again. In 1997, Mr Jagdeo purchased from the Government of Guyana, a plot of land situate at Goedverwagting, East Coast Demerara. He did so like thousands of other Guyanese who benefited from the government’s housing policy. At the time, he was not President. He was the Finance Minister. Like thousands of Guyanese in like circumstances, his transport was subject to a condition that he could not have sold the land which is the subject of the transport until after the expiration of ten years of the issue of the said transport. President Jagdeo faithfully observed that condition of the transport to its letter. He sold the said plot of land in the year 2010. The condition had expired.
Ms Sookdeo next argues that the allocation to a former Chairman of Region 10, of a house lot in the area where Mr Jagdeo‘s current property is located, constitutes “empirical data” in support of her contention, that the offer to sell two acres of land was only made to Mr Jagdeo. By any standard, this is befuddling logic. The simple and plain fact is that the Regional Chairman could only have been allocated that for which he made an offer to buy. Is there any evidence whatsoever that he made an offer to buy a larger portion than that which he was allocated? No such evidence has been made available. The contention of Ms Sookdeo, therefore, dies a natural death. The remainder of the letter consists of inferences drawn and conclusions made, all predicated upon the two aforementioned false premises. They are not, therefore, deserving of a response. And the obsession with former President Jagdeo continues. It has now shifted from his pensions to his property. I wonder what is next.
Yours faithfully,
Mohabir Anil Nandlall, MP
Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs
