News that the investigation into the macabre killing of eight men at Lindo Creek in 2008 has come to an end is unlikely to convince members of the public that real answers will be forthcoming.
There are many questions about this particularly heinous deed which are unanswered, foremost among which are who killed the eight men and how were they able to evade the justice system? It has been four long and difficult years for relatives who must now try to come to terms with the passing of their loved ones by burying remains, the discovery of which, has not helped them to see the culpable punished. It is an empty feeling and one that perpetuates a gnawing sense of injustice.
President Ramotar and his government have inherited an unfortunate legacy of stalled, still-born and unproductive investigations of many important matters. It was something that never apparently troubled former President Jagdeo. However President Ramotar is in a much weaker position having not won a majority of the vote at last year’s elections and there will be much greater pressure from the public to deliver on probes such as Lindo Creek. A number of initiatives could no doubt be undertaken to rekindle interest in the Lindo trail and it is left to be seen what the President, his Minister of Home Affairs and the police force will do in relation to it. There has for some time been a “mystery” witness in the custody of the police. Why he would still need their protection when the putative killers of the Lindo Creek octet are dead is unclear. The police need to establish whether he is indeed credible and he should be the star witness at a formal Commission of Inquiry into the Lindo Creek massacre.
The declaration of the end of the probe coincides with the tragic events in Linden that left three people dead after the police opened fire on protesters. The festering discontent in that town, the loss of life and injury to dozens demand an expeditious investigation that yields results.
The people of Linden and others aggrieved by the police action must draw a sense of justice from the proceedings. It means that the government must not be found wanting in relation to either the composing and resourcing of the inquiry or the implementation of its findings.
PPP/C governance is littered with enquiry wrecks which bespeak either of gross incompetence or a deliberate unwillingness to hold the guilty accountable. So for instance, the probe into whether former Minister of Home Affairs, Mr Ronald Gajraj was connected with the death squads completely lacked witness protection provisions and other attributes that would have made members of the public with tangible evidence feel comfortable about testifying.
On the implementation side, the Disciplined Forces Commission (DFC) report which included an international commissioner undertook serious work in assessing some of the same fault lines and operational deficiencies in the Guyana Police Force. The use of lethal force by the police was one of the areas examined. Implementation of these DFC recommendations might have erased the clear police incapacity in handling large demonstrations which lead to unwanted occurrences such as the blocking of vital infrastructure. This comprehensive report was submitted to the PPP/C government in May 2004. While piecemeal measures may have been taken, the comprehensive recommendations are yet to be grafted on to the four forces the Commission probed in an organized and structured manner. Interestingly, two of the Commissioners were the present Attorney General, Mr Nandlall and the current Leader of the Opposition, Mr Granger.
Then there was the infamous rubber bullets shooting by the police last December. A march by opposition supporters was fired upon recklessly by police using rubber bullets. Shots were discharged into the backs of men andwomen alike.
There could have been deadly consequences from this wanton act by the police. Again the question of who issued the command to fire and the hierarchical structure that was engaged was raised and not satisfactorily answered. The same type of culture exhibited in the December shootings was in evidence on Wednesday. Had the government taken the concerns raised seriously and convened an enquiry into the shooting there may have been instructive changes to the way the police handled crowds such as the one at Linden. It was a missed opportunity and reflective of an unwillingness by the government to ensure accountability. And, in supreme irony, one of the senior police officers who was named by Minister Rohee to participate in the investigation of the rubber bullets shooting, then Supt Clifton Hicken, is the same person who has been relieved of divisional command over the Linden shooting.
There are innumerable other cases where the government should have marshalled commissions of enquiry but didn’t for various reasons. These include the Lusignan and Bartica massacres, the violence on the East Coast during that period, the murder of Minister Sawh and his family and the cocaine-fuelled rampage of Roger Khan and his phantom gang.
So the government will enter discussions with the opposition on a Commission of Enquiry into the Linden shootings with a serious lack of credibility. It has to go all the way to ensure that it is seen as having no inhibitions about the full truth behind the shootings being disclosed and that it is prepared to implement the recommendations that flow from such a Commission.
One would hope that both the government and the opposition will engage fully with the residents of Linden on their views about how this enquiry should be conducted. Thereafter the government must move with alacrity. The onus is on it. The handling of the post-mortem examinations will be important. They must be done in the presence of the families of the three dead men and their anointed representatives with the provision for a second opinion if needed.
One presumes that the terms of reference for the enquiry will be concluded long before August 2nd. It should definitely make provision for some external membership as there is very little public trust of the government where these matters are concerned given its track record.
A credible figure from Caricom, the OAS, the Commonwealth or the United Nations will lend greater assurance to the public. Thereafter this Commission of Enquiry has to be properly resourced in terms of personnel, stipends, recording facilities and should sit continuously in Linden for around two weeks. An interim report should be issued in two weeks and thereafter a final report in a further two weeks. The end of September would be a reasonable period for the conclusion of proceedings.
Everything possible must be done by the government to ensure that the residents of Linden are made to feel that their grievances are being taken seriously. By the same token, the residents of Linden must ensure that they rein in extremist elements who may seek to take advantage of the present volatile situation.
