Dear Editor,
On Wednesday 21st August 2024 between 10.30 and 10.50 am I had an experience that convinced me beyond doubt that, I live in a country that is nothing short of a dictatorship.
I attempted to enter the main meeting room of the Arthur Chung Con-ference Centre where the National Toshaos’ Council (NTC) was having its Conference. As I pushed the door the Permanent Secretary (PS), Ministry Of Amerindian Affairs was exiting. I stepped back to allow him to pass. We exchanged greetings. As I was proceeding (or rather attempting to) the PS placed his arm across the doorway blocking my access. He asked where I was going. I explained that I had an interest in the ongoing deliberations of the NTC conference and again tried to go through the door. Again he stopped me. This time, with his hand on my chest. He told me that he could not let me enter.
He told me that he would not allow me to enter the meeting area. Upon inquiry, he told me that it was a “closed door meeting”. I produced an extract from the Amerindian Act, specifically, Section 43 (3) (b) and read it aloud to the PS as follows: “The National Toshaos’ Council shall-… allow Amerindians to attend its meetings…” The PS accused me of (a) ‘not understanding the law’ and (b) ‘reading it in isolation’. He, in turn referred to section 43 (1) (erroneously referring to it as section 41 (1)) which provides that: “The National Toshaos’ Council may determine its own procedure and may, in consultation with the Minister make rules governing such procedures.” I pointed out to the PS the mandatory provision of section 43 (3) (b) versus the optional nature of section 43 (1)’, making the point that, in the exercise of 43 (1) there is a process that involves the meeting of minds and the documenting of the procedure which could be compared with a minister making regulations. I, therefore, requested to see the documented procedure he referred to.
By then a plainclothes security officer who was summoned by the PS arrived. Shocked, I inquired why the PS would summon security when we were engaged in a civil conversation. By then the Minister of Amerindian Affairs arrived. I engaged her, requesting her intervention and compliance with section 43 (3) (b). The minister was dismissive. She said that it was not her meeting. Parliamentarian Seeraj arrived and so too did a senior commissioned police officer who said that he was there because of a threat of a security nature. The policeman (Williams) interrupted my conversation with MP Seeraj demanding to know if I was “invited” to the conference! The Vice Chairman of the NTC, a PPP activist, joined the conversation making it clear (after brief interaction) that it was her “final position” that I would not be allowed in the meeting room. Kwame McKoy then showed up armed with a cell phone, holding it up to my face. McKoy, a minister of government, phone camera aimed at me followed me everywhere I went including the washroom. I brought this to the police officer’s attention and was told that this is a public space and people can video whatever they wanted. I provided a detailed account of my encounter at the NTC conference to make the following points:
1. The PPP would stop at nothing to dominate and control every person and situation in furtherance of its political agenda; 2. The PPP engineered the election of its party activists to the NTC executive who would blindly contribute to the fulfilment of its agenda; 3. The PPP would openly persecute, intimidate, and harass any person or organisation it sees as a challenge to its brutish, naked abuse of power; 4. The PPP violates whichever law it wants to as it pursues its political objectives; 5. The PPP cherry-picks bits of legislation it finds convenient to its cause; 6. The PPP has an iron grip strangle hold on key members of the NTC executive, particularly its activists that it positioned there; 7. The PPP is ensuring that the Indigenous leaders do not interact with persons not associated with the government.
It is instructive to note that the agenda speaks only of “presentations” and “interactive discussions” and mentions nothing of “closed door meetings”. That the PPP would go to the lengths they have to exclude Indigenous Guyanese from the NTC conference, in clear violation of the law tells the tragic story of a government that has lost its way. This PPP government has no respect for citizens and the rule of law. This cannot be a democracy. The struggle for the rights of indigenous Guyanese continues. We were here before others arrived. We will always be here.
Sincerely,
Mervyn Williams
