Editorial did not critique Ramphal’s role in the Burnham gov’t

Dear Editor,

Reference is made to editorial “Sir Shridath Ramphal” (Sep 13). It was brilliantly written. Most Guyanese are in agreement with everything except the paragraphs pertaining to his role in and relating to Guyana “being a technocrat and dabbling in politics” and as Secretary General of Commonwealth. How could one be a member of parliament and a minister and still claim he was not dabbling in politics, they asked? Yes, he was brilliant. But most Guyanese felt or are of the opinion that he used that brilliance against the interests of his then colonial territory, country, and ethnicity.

The editorial noted that Ramphal advised Burnham that he would only be “a technocrat and not dabble in politics” even while sitting in the Senate (1965-68) and serving as an elected member after the 1968 electoral fraud. Ramphal knew who was behind the race riots of 1960s and its intended purpose and about Jagan’s ouster; dozens were killed and countless properties destroyed. Yet, he decided to serve and did the bidding of the party opposed to Jagan. He was also silent when the “Indian Indentured Immigration Fund” was appropriated by the government in 1970 when he knew there was an agreement among leaders of Indian organizations to use the funds to construct regional Indian cultural centres.

The editorial did not critique Ramphal’s role in the Burnham government; it simply stated that he was non-political. A minister can’t be apolitical or non-political; that is a contradiction of terms. What the editorial seems to be suggesting: is it is okay to be part of rigging, an illegal government, marginalizing people and one that commits so many other wrongdoings as long as one claims “I am a technocrat, not a politician.” Many could have done the same — joined the government from 1966 onwards and made similar claims or requests to get ahead. We did not! We maintained integrity as did Jagan and others. We continued with our moral compass. We decided to continue living a morally upright life.

Ramphal spent 15 years enjoying office at Marlborough House. Others, spent two decades, including 15 years appealing to Ramphal to assist in the battle for restoration of democracy. Not once did he lend a helping hand to restore democracy in his homeland. He blanked us. He laughed and mocked us when we picketed his presence in Trinidad, New York, Guyana. He never apologized for his role in Guyana or his silence on the dictators. And he never addressed the issue of rigged elections or of cheating Jagan of his legal right to office.

Requesting technocratic status from an illegal ruler or telling the public “I am not political” is or was a way to circumvent controversial issues of the day to serve the illegal government, to gain status, to enjoy the perks of office, and to move on to bigger games. The country is paying for such acts, not only those of Ramphal but from others as well, till this day.

Sincerely,

Vishnu Bisram