Dear Editor,
In the USA of late, any critic of the Iraq invasion is branded unpatriotic by Republicans, and in so labelling the merits of the criticism are lost or ignored. The PPP’s ad hominem attacks on Dr Janette Bulkan share the same strategy – they malign her credentials, attack her integrity and question her patriotism, so that in the process public attention can be diverted from the substance of her criticisms. But Guyanese should resist such distractions, and instead reflect carefully on whether the value of what Dr Bulkan has been saying over the past few years is truly undermined by her alleged failure to protest a map included in an official document of the Government of Suriname. Dr Bulkan claims that she was not present at the meeting in Washington DC where Suriname officially presented its report containing the map – but her position on that map is completely irrelevant to the real issue of her competence in the area of forest management.
The long-standing problem with the Suriname border is an issue that should be taken up by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, not a private citizen. I could well ask: what has this government done to ensure the safety of its citizens on the Corentyne River, who are at the mercy of Surinamese pirates and a hostile neighbour? I could also ask: why did the PPP government agree to the accession of Suriname to Caricom (which, presumably, the PNC had resisted while it was in power) without some definitive settlement of the New River Triangle dispute?
However, I will not seriously pursue these questions, not only because the answer is that the PPP provides no leadership on issues of substance, but also because territorial disputes are the province of governments, not lone activists, however eminently qualified the latter may be. The real issue raised by the PPP’s vindictive attack on Dr Janette Bulkan is whether there are any merits to her sustained criticisms of the GFC and President Jagdeo’s LCDS. Those who read her articles must realise that her concerns are mainly illegal forest practices – she argues that the allocation and trading of concessions to and by Asian loggers in violation of national laws and policies have resulted in a massive trade in Guyana’s prime timber species, with little benefit to the local economy, either in employment or value-added products. Rather than trade in insults and make unsupported statements about Dr Bulkan’s understanding of forestry practices or her objectivity and patriotism, the government should deal with substance and answer the specifics of her criticisms.
According to the government complaint to the World Bank, Dr Bulkan has “participated in slanderous statements accusing the government and president of incompetency [sic] and shady activities.” Let me add that if Dr Bulkan’s statements are indeed untrue or unsupportable, then this also makes them actionable. In other words, if Dr Bulkan has participated in slander against the government and the President, they ought to have sued her in the local courts, instead of secretly getting her removed from an international panel. But litigation would have required a full ventilation of the substance of her claims, as well as the release of official records jealously guarded by the GFC, hence the petty reaction instead.
Let me close by making a full disclosure: Janette is my sister, so my objectivity may be legitimately questioned. However, Janette is obviously able to defend herself, and my interest is in the larger issues of freedom of speech, democracy and good governance. In Guyana today there is little room for public discussion, and citizens who speak out are harassed and victimized. Readers may recall that at the launching of Guyana Times in May 2008, Dr Yesu Persaud pointed to the irregularity of the tax concessions granted to the newspaper’s parent company, which happened to be owned by the President’s close friend. The President’s immediate response was a public and unseemly tongue-lashing of this elder statesman, then later obscenely to amend the law retroactively so as to validate the earlier illegality. Freddie Kissoon, another fearless academic who constantly criticises the PPP, has been minutely investigated by the GRA, while at the same time money laundering continues apace and with apparent impunity in Guyana. Head of the Press Association Gordon Moseley was banned from entering the Office of the President, and in an interview defending such intolerance the President stated that it is a “privilege” for reporters to go to the Office of the President. (SN, October 18, 2009) On a significantly larger scale, Stabroek News was starved of government ads for an extended period two years ago, while Tony Vieira, a PNC parliamentarian and vocal critic of the government, was hounded out of broadcasting last year.
As these examples show, despite the rhetoric of democracy, the PPP simply cannot tolerate opposing views, and their venom stretches from poor academics (Janette and Freddie) to big companies (VCT 28 and Stabroek News). Such behaviour, however, is incompatible with a truly democratic state. As it was put in the Canadian Supreme Court: “Without [the] freedom to express ideas and criticise the operation of institutions and the conduct of individual members of government agencies, democratic forms of government would wither and die…” Closer home, one of our own jurists, Justice of Appeal R H Luckhoo, described freedom of expression as “one of the pillars which support the edifice of a free and healthy society.”
Do we have a ‘free and healthy society’ in Guyana today? This latest action of the PPP reveals the extent to which this government fears public scrutiny, as well as the depths to which it will go in order to silence critics. Guyanese, however, ought to resist being muzzled, for constructive criticism and the exposing of incompetence and corruption promote good governance and force governments to be accountable to the electorate. If we fall for this red herring about Dr Bulkan’s patriotism – that is, focus on the messenger – we will lose the value of her message. If Dr Bulkan’s message is valueless then the government should tell us why, instead of resorting to petty insults and victimization, inside and out of Guyana.
Yours faithfully
Arif Bulkan
