Dear Editor,
It is now an accepted fact that David Granger has breached the Constitution of Guyana in his relatively short reign as President more than any other President. The Caribbean Court of Justice pronounced that Granger illegally appointed James Patterson as GECOM’s chairman. Among other infractions, the Court found that he violated Article 106 of the constitution by refusing to accept his government’s defeat in the no-confidence motion. Yet, Granger keeps denying that he has violated the laws and constitution of the country.
Now he is denying that the people have rejected his coalition government at the ballots cast at the general elections. All sources, without exception, have vouched for the creditability of the elections. But Granger is denying this truth. He and his cabal undermine the evidence by creating the suspicion that nothing is what it seems to be.
The recount of the ballots provided irrefutable evidence that the incumbent administration lost the election. But they are trying to discredit the records and facts by constantly changing the narrative with unproven allegations. The strategy has been to overwhelm their supporters with a constant barrage of untruths. They cast their aspersions far and wide. Anyone that does not buy into the lie becomes an enemy to be vilified. They have expanded the net to include the main opposition party, then all the other political parties, now they are including GECOM and even their election agents. This desperate move is playing the victim role. They are not only trying to show that the PPP and others are lying and fraudulent but to rehabilitate their reputation. The pertinent question becomes what drives people like David Granger to deny the truth. History is chequered with personalities who find ways, including sophisticated language to the baldest lies, to deceive themselves and others. They refuse to accept that others are telling the truth and that their own words and actions are wrong. They fabricate their own truth through a web of deception. If only Granger and the cabal carry out an honest examination of their time in office they would understand and accept that the people have rejected them. The people have made a choice based on the government’s actions and inactions that affected them directly. The reckless closure of four sugar estates causing over 7,000 workers and their family to the breadline; termination of 1,872 Amerindian Community Service Officers, an instant increase of Senior Ministers’ salaries by 50%; the introduction of over 150 punitive tax measures; failure to pay heed to the Auditor General’s Report on wrongdoings; and turning state authorities, such as SOCU and SARA, into political stooges are only a few of the considerations voters based their decision on to oust the incumbent government.
In the meantime, those of us who are at the mercy of the authoritative deniers must do what we can not to become unwary victims of the deniers. The approach of the main and other opposition parties, along with the progressive media houses has been to debunk every untruth at every point regardless of how ludicrous or preposterous they are. My observation is that these soldiers of democracy have carried out this exercise in a patient, professional, and civil manner. They have challenged the untruths calmly, seriously, and respectfully, not angrily and contemptuously unlike the incumbent.
David Granger ought to take note, as a historian, that the effect on the denier is that he is deemed as a falsifier of history and facts resulting in the rejection of his claim as a historian.
Yours faithfully,
Tameshwar N Lilmohan
Toronto, Canada
