Dear Editor,
The Declaration of Chapultepec was adopted by the Inter American Press Association at its Hemisphere Conference on Free Speech held in Chapultepec, at Chapultepec Castle, in Mexico City, on 11th March, 1994. It sets out the ten (10) principles which guide and govern freedom of expression and of the press and to which all the governments who observe and practice democracy have committed and signed on to, including the Government of Guyana.
In August 1998, experts in inter-American law, journalists and editors from all of the Americas met and reaffirmed the ten (10) principles in San Jose, Costa Rica.
Its first principle declares that “No people or society can be free without freedom of expression and of the press. The exercise of this freedom is not something authorities grant; it is an inalienable right of the people”.
Its eighth principle declares that “The membership of journalists in guilds, their affiliation to professional and trade associations and the affiliation of the media with business groups must be strictly voluntary”.
The Guyana Press Association (GPA) is the one body representing professional media practitioners and journalists in our country and has been doing so for some time. I was, at one time, an active member when I served as the General Manager of the Guyana Chronicle which was then privately owned. In fact, it was in that capacity that I was the recipient of an Inter-American Press Association Freedom of the Press Award for defending freedom of the press when it was threatened by our government and that provided me with a scholarship to attend Boston University’s School of Public Communications.
It is, therefore, with some considerable concern that I observed the controversy into which the credibility and, as a result, the efficacy of the GPA to speak for freedom of expression and freedom of the press in Guyana has become enmeshed.
I have witnessed, in dismay, the obvious absence of transparency and internal conflict which has undermined the credibility of the GPA’s conduct of its elections at its Annual General Meeting on Sunday last.
What occurred has been described in some factual detail in a letter in the Stabroek News of Tuesday, 16th May, 2023, by Neil Marks, who was contesting for the Presidency.
It remains inexplicable why the GPA’s Executive, for instance, refused to disclose, well in advance, a list of its eligible members to vote at the elections.
According to the GPA’s Constitution, Full Members, essentially those who have practiced as professional journalists for a minimum of three (3) years, “shall be entitled to exercise full voting rights in the affairs of the Association”. There is nothing in the Constitution that requires their names to be kept secret or withheld from public scrutiny prior to the election, which the outgoing Executive, under the then Presidency of the newly elected President, Ms. Nazima Raghubir, insisted upon. The outgoing Secretary, Ms. Svetlana Marshall-Abrams, admits as much in a letter to Neil Marks, that the names will only be revealed on the actual day of the elections, inviting the obvious question as to why?
I find it particularly disappointing that a highly respected Attorney, Mr. Ronald Burch-Smith, should agree to preside as the Returning Officer over an election fraught with such controversy. Regardless of the fact that he had no authority to intervene in the process, his very presence lent credibility to an incredulous election.
To mark World Press Freedom Day, the Heads of Missions of the United States of America, the British High Commission, the Canadian High Commission and the Delegation of the European Union emphasized that “it is imperative that all stakeholders, including decision makers such as the government and the opposition, maintain a mutually respectful relationship with the media in its capacity as the fourth estate and as a vital part of democracy in action”.
Unfortunately, the GPA, by its own thoughtless behaviour, has seriously undermined the maintenance of that mutual respect.
The above said, it remains essential that the Guyana Press Association should recover and restore its credibility in order to fulfill its responsibility to represent the voice and concerns of a free media. It cannot, however, do so with any degree of respect nor regard headed by an Executive which cannot find legitimacy in its elections.’
It is now incumbent upon Ms. Raghubir and those who were placed in the Executive of the GPA alongside of her, to put right what has clearly gone wrong.
Yours sincerely,
Kit Nascimento
