Dear Editor,
I refer to the sentiment expressed recently by Mr. Jerome Khan, that voters should not be held to ransom by Guyana’s political history. Respect is due to his opinion, regardless of his association or past association with the PNC. Unfortunately, voters have always been held to ransom by Guyana’s political history.
In an election, history is everything. The past is without an equal as a gauge by which voters measure candidates and parties. Voters do not vote as if in a vacuum. Politicians, therefore, should allow voters to vote as they see fit, with free access to Guyana’s political history. Whoever wins the elections democratically, let them govern.
To ask voters (or voters from a certain section of the electorate) to ignore the history of one political party but not the others, is to discriminate. Said another way, it is double standards. If PPP history is relevant, so too is PNC history.
Let there not be one law for jaguars and another for jackasses. But this is happening. Currently, the AFC/APNU have advertisements that refer to the PPP/Dr. Cheddi Jagan as far back as 1964. Yet, voters are told to ignore PNC history.
Further, to strip voters of the benefit of memory is to make them handicapped, and to interfere with their right to freely enjoy political speech. Voting is, after all, protected political speech and for politicians contesting the elections to suggest what voters should forget and what they should remember, is an interference with a voter’s fundamental right.
Finally, the past is just too interesting to set aside. Consider, for example, the following illustration. During an interview, Mr. David Granger rightfully noted that the PPP failed to have an inquiry into the death of a PPP minister (Sash Sawh). Mr. Moses Nagamootoo, his companion by his side, said nothing. Now, with the aid of PNC history, one would know this: The PNC failed to have an inquiry into the death of a PNC minister (Vincent Teekah).
Yours faithfully,
Rakesh Rampertab
