Dear Editor,
Reading the newspapers literally and sometimes, between the lines, one cannot help concluding that there is a psychosis of fear, relating to the expectation on the part of people of some negative impact, real or imagined, against their interest. Take, for example, the Gecom Chairman appointment.
Reports in the press assert that some people who were approached asked that their names not be published! Why? Maybe they did not want to be viewed by some members of the public as being accessible to or associated with the political opposition.
Another example is the Attorney General and Justice F Holder debacle. In this instance, the Judge recused himself in the face of alleged misconduct in his court on the part of the Attorney General, and the publication of a letter to the AG sent by the Prime Minister to the effect that he was “afraid” that he may not be given a fair hearing if Justice Holder continued to hear the case. Even the PM is afraid. Add to this the perception that the Chancellor (ag), was in error, as a consequence of a meeting of the judges to consider the complaint by Justice Holder and the judges’ approval that she write the President. Some Senior Counsel and a former AG are on record as saying this was a mistake.
Justice Cummings-Edwards has an acting appointment and the AG is the principal legal adviser to President Granger who plays a major role in the appointment of the substantive Chancellor.
Not the least of the tactics of fear, intimidation and oppression is the fact that SARU and SOCU have been used to target public officials and perceived opposition persons, eg, Nandlall, Sharif, Duncan, the RPA five, etc.
With the acknowledged increase of the ex-military in government, the public service and on government-appointed boards, the public may be forgiven for getting the impression that people in general are now more fearful.
Yours faithfully,
Clement J Rohee
