People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) lawyer Basil Williams yesterday attacked the credibility of former House of Israel priest Joseph Hamilton, suggesting that all the testimony that he has given to the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into Walter Rodney’s death is untrue and calling for the PPP/C Member of Parliament (MP) to be charged with perjury.
Williams, during his cross-examination, accused Hamilton of making scandalous and false allegations not only against him but also a former leader of the PNC, following his testimony on Monday that at the behest of the then governing party PNC, the House of Israel disrupted Working People’s Alliance (WPA) meetings during the late 1970s. He also said that a member of the ruling party later armed the group with guns as there was concern that the WPA might retaliate because of the “more suppressive” techniques used to disrupt meetings.
Williams is looking out for the interest of the PNCR at the hearings. The PNC, during its time in government was accused of engineering the death of Rodney, who was a co-leader of the WPA and a fierce opponent of the Forbes Burnham administration’s rule.
During the completion of his evidence-in-chief at the Supreme Court law Library yesterday, Hamilton said he regretted the activities he was engaged in while a member of the House of Israel. The now 60-year-old grandfather said that he made a bad choice and a bad decision, which caused great harm to people. “There are regrets. I continue to live with that past. It is here with me and so I have no difficulty presenting the past as I know it, as I participated in it,” he stressed. He added that the only hurdle he has to cross is having a conversation with his wife and children. He said once they indicated that they are prepared to support him, what anyone else says does not matter.
“…In light of the evidence you have given, would you agreed with me that you are standing in the capacity of what is popularly called a snitch?” Williams asked. Hamilton, in response, said that he did not know what that meant and he later agreed that he was a whistleblower.
He denied that he was betraying loyalty and explained that he thought that it was his moral duty as a citizen of Guyana to come to the inquiry and to speak about his activities in an organisation that participated in terrorising opposition persons. “If you interpret it as a snitch,
