Dear Editor,

I refer to Mr Michael Maxwell’s letter of March, 18, 2009 in the Stabroek News, with the caption ‘What was the information which President Jagdeo had about Clarke and which vindicated him?’

National security has to do with a safe and secure environment where the spotlight is on constructing and reconstructing a flourishing, democratic, peaceful, and just society; a society that can ensure the sustainability of human rights and dignity for all Guyanese.

The central element of national security is for all Guyanese to live a better quality of life and reach their maximum potential.

The President as Commander-in-Chief, within the national security context, has enormous responsibilities to monitor and review intelligence relating to threats to the security of this nation, among other things. Based on available intelligence some time ago, the President in his judgment ascertained that Major David Clarke would not function in the best interests of the security of this nation. So, let us not second-guess the President as to what he might have done or not have done in light of that intelligence.

Most countries would view the information on Clarke as national security intelligence. And so armed with this kind of security intelligence, the President is not obligated to inform these letter writers in the print media, as to how he should have proceeded on the Clarke matter, for the reason that the parameter in focus was intelligence on national security.

Consistent with the national security interest, the President acted appropriately in not promoting Clarke, by virtue of the intelligence available to him. Today, we know more about Clarke. And the President is vindicated in the line of action he effected against Clarke.

Yours faithfully,
Prem Misir