Dear Editor,
In “Nandlall defends publishing of info on GHRA – says gov’t will not be timid” (Mar 25), the Attorney General posed several questions to Mike McCormack querying the co-President’s democratic credentials as head of the body. They are fair questions. I have a few also related to democratic credentials for Mr. Nandlall: Was he a victim of a lack of democratic process in selecting the PPP nominee? Was the PPP Presidential nominee in January 2019 fairly elected by the party’s Central Committee and or was there a threatening directive to CC members on how members must vote or face sanctions (read — end to party perks and paid positions)? If the selection process was free and fair, would Nandlall not have been the nominee and gone on to be elected President in a landslide in 2020? If he were the candidate, would it have taken five months for Gecom to declare the winner?
Mr. Nandlall’s public exposure of the status of GHRA and retort to Mr. McCormack is plain reprisal for the gentleman’s independent position on EITI and questioning the expenditure on new ID cards that were not discussed in parliament and not vetted by the public in a national hearing. McCormack was simply questioning bullyism and wasteful expenditures. He has that right as a Guyanese individual as well as a co-President of GHRA. How he was selected as leader of GHRA has nothing to do with questioning government’s business or policies. Like McCormack, Nandlall is a good person. They both have Guyana at heart and want the best for our country. But Nandlall is a far more powerful figure than McCormack who has the power of the national purse and media goons with him. Nandlall says he will defend his government – that is his right and he is paid to do so. McCormack is defending his organization and what is best for the country and receives no remuneration for doing so.
The fact that GHRA and McCormack made no public statements against the 2020 attempted rigging is not justification to target them for ridicule or to expose their duplicitous behavior. GHRA and McCormack were also silent on PPP selection of Presidential nominee in January 2019. Nandlall didn’t excoriate them. GHRA and McCormack have earned the respect and right to question government’s behaviour from their earlier activism against rights abuses and rigging. GHRA combated Burnhamism, and he and his wife were in the forefront to champion free and fair elections during the latter years of the Hoyte dictatorship.
Why stop at McCormack and GHRA in determining who is GRA compliant? Why not also go after others who were also silent in 2020, or worse those who supported rigging? There were several business figures who were straddling the center waiting to see the outcome in 2020 before jumping on board; they are closely with PPP today when they were backing the other side during the rigging episode. They are getting huge contracts and becoming multi-millionaires. Why isn’t Nandlal going after their businesses and organizations for failing to be compliant with GRA rules? And while going after McCormack and GHRA for not speaking out against the 2020 electoral fraud, what is he and his government doing to reward those who combated fraud?
Nandlall knows better than to go after a decent, honest, humble, simple man who seeks what is best for the country. The AG is unquestionably the most learned and intelligent among the lot in government and in the entire parliament. He is a polished speaker and an orator. He does not fumble for the right choice of words when speaking. Why go after an organization that simply wants to hold government accountable and transparent? As a legal figure, whose duty is to encourage government transparency, he should have saluted GHRA and McCormack. I must confess that for the first time I am most disappointed in the action of the AG. I hope it will be the last! His fans are taking note!
Sincerely,
Rudesh Jodha