Dear Editor,
In our highly partisan political process where there is no wall of separation between party and state, it is conceivable that every now and then the Head of State would descend into partisan ‘busing out.’ All our presidents have done it; some more than others. But this president takes the cake. He does it as if it were part of his oath of office. Yesterday it was Hinds, Ogunseye, Corbin and Kissoon. Today it’s Christopher Ram. Tomorrow it will be somebody else. When you add it all up it amounts to what a calypsonian once called “Shame and Disgrace in the Family.” Must we be reminded that this person is the institutional face of our country? He and his supporters and some non-supporters spent the last month reminding us, as if we needed a reminder, that he is the President of all of Guyana and is free to visit any village in the country. What will they tell us now – that as President he is free to abuse any citizen when he wants?
The treatment of Christopher Ram at the National Cultural Centre on Thursday is cause for major concern. “Not in my meeting,” screams the President. “Ram shall not speak in my meeting.” Read that in our Guyana to mean, “Not in my country.” When the President recently interpreted some to be saying “Not in my village,” he called them bigots. Now he chases people out of “his meeting.” Talk about double standards! Guyanese had better “take warning” to paraphrase another musical poet of yesteryear. This President is out of control.
For the most part, we have lost the ability to call a spade a spade. “The President is wrong but those who criticize him are more wrong,” we say. “The government is doing wrong things, but if you call it a dictatorship or advocate agitation you are wrong,” we reason. We editorialize that the President’s visit to Buxton “is one of the most undisguised acts of political opportunism in recent times,” but David Hinds’ reaction was excessive. The President denies Ram the right to speak; Ram describes the action as “idiotic.” But, according to one letter writer, both of them must apologise. While we are bound to respect the presidency, the office, the person holding that office is equally bound to respect the office and uphold its dignity. In the end a country gets the leader it cultivates.
For the record, few can reasonably dispute Christopher Ram’s position that it is the Bank of Guyana, the liquidator, and not the President who should be talking to the Clico policyholders. Ram’s view is grounded in law and political ethics. But he obviously angered the President, who evidently cares little about law and ethics. You see, there is more in the mortar than the pestle. Ram touched a nerve – a raw one. He is asking, among other things – why is the President continuing this business of spending his presidential days “sharing out” things to people? Further, why is the President disregarding the court? Ram is taking aim at governance and the rule of law. Many people, including some non-partisan ones, cannot see how demeaning and wrong these practices by the Head of State are. Some at the Cultural Centre cheered when the President tore into Ram. We gone fuh channa. Or at least we going.
Yours faithfully,
David Hinds
