Dear Editor,
I have read Mr Hamilton Green’s letter to Stabroek News published on May 15 captioned ‘The city councilors acted out of sheer frustration…’ and I feel compelled to rise to the defence of Ms Sooba, the acting Town Clerk.
It ought to be clear to everyone by one that Mr Green and some other councillors are waging a multi-pronged war on Ms Sooba to force her out. This unrelenting campaign has been waged by strikes, picketing exercises, demonstrations, a letter-writing campaign, struggle within the council, mobilizing staff and vendors and approaching the minister to secure her removal.
The city has never seen such a campaign planned, orchestrated and prosecuted in such an unconscionable fashion by former politicians who claim to be elected by the citizens, but in fact have had no legitimacy at all since 1997. These very politicians who operate under an illusion that after nineteen years one can still be legitimately a city councillor obviously are not familiar with the Municipal Act 28:01 or the Constitution of Guyana.
These are the same former politicians who in the days and years of the worst excesses and corruption and stealing at City Hall never once raised their voices against those involved in racketeering and lawlessness.
Clearly they were comfortable with those elements or may claim ignorance of the facts. This hypocrisy is truly amazing. I hold no brief for Ms Sooba but have some familiarity with City Hall. It was partially in response to my reports to Mr Keith Burrowes on my findings at City Hall that led to the removal of the notorious Pluck, Erskine, Meredith, troika and the elevation of Ms Sooba to the position of acting Town Clerk. From the very beginning many members of the now ineffective and expired council were unhappy with the minister’s decision, but having previously readily accepted the imposition of the now dismissed Town Clerk by a former minister, they found themselves in an unenviable position arguing against the present minister’s decision.
More especially, since the minister did not impose their own favoured candidate selected from among their own old boys/old girls network, the campaign was immediately launched to boycott Ms Sooba, to make life uncomfortable for her in every possible way in order to drive her from the position. This campaign of intimidation and bullyism has continued uninterrupted. In Mr Green’s letter, he attempted to give the reasons for the great “frustration” felt by the expired councillors. In short, Ms Sooba who was identified by the minister over the one “identified” by the illegal council (since 1997?) has been behaving like a “dictator” and showing disrespect and displaying “insubordination” to the Mayor in a memo, thus provoking His Worship’s request for her “immediate removal.”
All of this, of course, is a lot of hogwash.
According to Mr Green’s letter, the Minister of Local Government agreed with all this rubbish about “insubordination” and improperly agreed to restrict her to communicate with the media, which we are told, she rightfully ignored.
Additionally, Ms Sooba is alleged to have placed two new straws on the camel’s back and his back broke ‒ a deceitful straw and an un-truthful straw.
All the camels whose backs were now irreparably broken decided not to sit at any meeting with her. This is déjà vu all over again, to use an American phrase.
Remember Mr Rohee and the now famous but unproductive walkout until the Speaker ruled?
But back to City Hall.
The entire notion of Ms Sooba being disrespectful and insubordinate is rubbish. The expired councillors who are waging an all-out war against Ms Sooba cannot command any respect from her, and if indeed she appears not to have any respect for them, then they brought it upon themselves and should stop complaining.
They deserve exactly what they get. As for “insubordination,” this is pure nonsense. The Town Clerk is never subordinate to any councillor. His/her duties are set out in the Municipal Act 28:01 and it sure as hell does not include being subordinate to any councillor.
In male-dominated societies, as a general rule, men have problems with independent, assertive women in leadership positions and when challenged, invariably demand “apology,” “respect” and “subservience.” Some of these men are living in the past and deserve the rebuff they sometimes receive.
The fact of the matter is that this so-called council is an utter disgrace and is not respected by anyone as far as I am aware. They lack all legitimacy having been elected nineteen years ago, and they have been a continuing disaster visited upon the city.
Their incompetence is legendary and lack of concern for the welfare of the city and its citizens is well documented. For years they happily presided over and never raised their voices over the corruption, nastiness and dishonesty rampant in the place.
But the central government also carries a responsibility for this continuing travesty.
The time has come to establish the Local Govern-ment Commission as required by the constitution and to hold new elections.
While this is being put in place the minister should use his powers under the act and immediately dismiss the entire lot of councillors from all the parties in this decaying, moribund, expired and illegitimate forum. They have all failed miserably and are a total disgrace. Only someone without pride and totally oblivious to the citizens’ welfare would presume to continue to sit there and to collect monies and perks. Strangely enough, this insolvent organisation still provides generous perks to some councillors including free security guards, 24-hour guard service (compliments city police), chauffeur-driven SUV, personal staff, unlimited fuel allowance and a forum to garner publicity.
The minister ought to urgently and immediately consult with all the political parties represented in the National Assembly and other relevant groups to put in place a temporary council of persons of integrity and ability to assist the city managers to serve this city.
Yours faithfully,
Ramon Gaskin
