With the case file on an allegation of rape against the Minister of Local Government, Nigel Dharamlall now with the Director of Public Prose-cutions (DPP) for legal advice, opposition parties yesterday kept up the pressure for answers and accountability from both the embattled minister and the administration.
Meanwhile, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo yesterday reiterated that government has an uncompromising stand against misconduct by officials.
“The president from the inception has said in our midst, this goes for both party and government, we don’t tolerate the abuse of children and adults. If the allegations prove true, if the minister is found guilty then he has to face the consequences,” he said.
During the press conference yesterday at Office of the President, he stated that the government has decided to stay silent on the matter in order to prevent the opposition from spinning what is said. Jagdeo nonetheless stated that he will speak on Dharamlall’s matter at a later date.
“I can answer this issue when we are done with this matter. I am not going answer that issue now… I don’t want to say anything on any issue with Nigel Dharamlall at this point in time that maybe seen as the opposition and social media people have said, as ‘subverting the course of justice’” Jagdeo said.
Dharamlall, the party’s general secretary said, has not attended party meetings that have been held since the investigation has been underway.
Critics have said that Dharamlall exhibited a pattern of misbehaviour over a number of years and this was tolerated by the PPP/C government, leading to the present predicament.
Meanwhile, the opposition and sections of civil society continue to demand Dharamlall’s removal from office.
The Guyana Police Force yesterday morning said that the investigation which was launched on Monday, has been completed and the file sent for legal advice.
Even if the DPP advises against charges for Dharamlall, Jagdeo on the sidelines of the press conference yesterday, said that his return to office will be at the discretion of Presi-dent Irfaan Ali and cabinet.
Yesterday, General Secretary of A New and United Guyana, Timothy Jonas, said that while Dharamlall has a right not to incriminate himself he must answer questions that relate to his suitability to hold the positions of minister and MP.
Jonas said that outside of the criminal court, no such right of silence, or right to be presumed innocent, extends to Dharamlall the Minister of Govern-ment and Member of Par-liament.
“The holder of such a high office is sworn to uphold the law and to act in the interest of Guyanese, and must be answerable to the people for his conduct. I contend that Dharamlall the Minister has a duty to answer the following questions, none of which convicts for rape, but each of which in my view speaks to his suitability to hold high office or any office in our country:
Did Dharamlall ever correspond with the child privately via telephone?
Was the child ever with Dharamlall at a residence or hotel in Campbellville or anywhere else in Georgetown?
Did Dharamlall ever give money to the child?
Did Dharamlall ever give money to the parents of the child?
Did Dharamlall procure the involvement of Region 2 Commander Khemraj Shivbaran to take a statement from the Child?
“If he refuses to answer these questions, how can the Government continue to protect him, even if he is not proved guilty in a Court of Law?”, Jonas asked.
Separate
Yesterday at separate demonstrations, non-governmental organisations, the Amerindian Peoples Association and Red Thread protested outside of the Arthur Chung Confer-ence Centre (ACCC) where the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) was hearing cases. Meanwhile members of the opposition led protest action outside the Office of the President.
At both protests the call was made for Dharamlall to be removed from office on the basis of what is known about the case. The protestors also called out the Ministry of Human Services and Social Secu-rity and the Child Care and Protection Agency for denying the 16-year-old complainant in state care, an independent attorney.
The teen’s mother on Wednesday attempted to secure an attorney on her behalf but attorney-at-law and former Minister of Public Security, Khemraj Ramjattan, was prevented by the Child Care and Pro-tection Agency from providing legal representation.
Dr Vindhya Persaud, Minister of Human Services and Social Security, yesterday morning initially responded to messages from this newspaper but later deleted the message. Follow up messages were unanswered. In her early Thursday morning response, Persaud stated that there was no truth to the allegations that the 16-year-old was denied independent legal presentation.
According to sources, the mother of the child requested that the girl’s rights be protected by a lawyer and two names were suggested.
A statement yesterday from the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, demanded that the “investigation be fair and impartial in every sense and be free from any political influence, interference, directive, and be undertaken in keeping with the law.”
It noted that all issues such as the fact that the complainant was taken back to the house must be dealt with immediately to ensure justice and the adherence to the rule of law.
The statement registered disappointment at the fact that the accused was present during the visit to the house and said that this flies in the face of the rule of law and the protection of the victim.
“It is unacceptable and must be condemned… We will continue to be an unrelenting advocate for the protection of our Indigenous sisters. We owe it to our Indigenous sisters to promote and protect their rights,” the statement said. It was pointed out that this case will be the litmus test as to whether the elites in Guyana’s society are above the law.
“We must all remain steadfast in our commitment to ensure that no one is above the law and justice is the victor in this process of dealing with the alleged heinous crime that was committed by a sitting Minister and Member of Parliament,” the opposition stated.
Sidelines
The opposition also questioned the rationale behind Acting Head of the Child Care and Protection Agency (CPA), Tionna October being kept on the sidelines at the ministry in handling the matter. The APNU+AFC in their statement said that October, a consummate professional with over ten years of experience working under the stewardship of Ann Greene, the former Head of the CPA, is not being utilized.
“Levine Gouveia with less than two years of experience has been identified to handle this sensitive matter. This is unacceptable,” the party said yesterday.
Gouveia on Wednesday abruptly ended a call from this newspaper when contacted for a response to the allegation that the complainant had been denied access to a lawyer. Gouveia answered the initial call but after being told it was from the Stabroek News, she terminated it. All other calls went unanswered.
The Guyana Police Force in a statement refuted claims that the complainant or her parents made a request to the police for independent legal representation.
“At all times, the virtual complainant and her parents were in the presence and hearing of the childcare officer, and this fact can also be corroborated by her,” the statement issued by Deputy Director of Corporate Communications at the Guyana Police Force, Stan Gouveia informed.
Dharamlall’s attorney, Nigel Hughes, on Tuesday told Stabroek News that a visit to his house was made after investigators requested to search the property. The search was done in the presence of the complainant at the property where the crime purportedly occurred. He told this newspaper that the complainant was accompanied by two persons in addition to the investigators during the visit.
However, this move by the police is being heavily criticized by sections of civil society and activists.
The force also dismissed allegations that the minors, including the complainant’s seven-year-old brother were questioned in the absence of their parents or welfare officers.
“The Guyana Police Force can confirm that all Standard Operating Procedures were followed in the conduct of this investigation. At no time whatsoever were any of the minors involved in this investigation questioned in the absence of a parent and a welfare officer,” the force responded in a statement on Wednesday night.
It was explained that when the complainant walked investigators through the alleged crime scene, under the supervision of a Superintendent of Police, the accused was not present. The police said he had already left as he was instructed to do by investigators.
One source decried the fact that the child was taken back to the alleged scene of the crime as “this should not have happened.” It was noted that the child had already located the alleged house and to take her in the home was further traumatising her.
“To take that child where the crime [allegedly] happened should not have been, she would have been terribly affected. The child protection officers should have been able to tell the police no, she has already identified the house and that is enough. More should be done to protect the rights of the child,” a source said.
It was also stated that the agency should have gone to the courts for a protection order as this would have been the better avenue to protect the rights of the child. However, this newspaper understands that the agency does not have an in-house lawyer as was in the case in the past and as such it is further hamstrung in this aspect.
