The PPP should examine its own abysmal record with respect to press freedom

Dear Editor,

I read with complete revulsion the statement by the Government of Guyana condemning the attack on the French newspaper, accompanied by the claim that it subscribes to the principle of the “full and effective exercise of the freedom of the press.” The statement added that freedom of the press “is an indispensable instrument for the functioning of representative democracy.”

There can be no dispute that the PPP regime has always been acutely aware of the power of a free press, since it has consistently and ruthlessly pursued a policy of stamping out free speech whenever and however it can with an attention to detail that is absent in other areas of their performance. Their approach has been multifaceted and thorough – and largely successful as well, since only a few are able and willing to challenge the regime publicly.

Without exception, individuals critical of the government are harassed, vilified and victimised. This is sometimes done openly, as in Aishalton where a heckler was slapped, but more often than not effected semi-covertly using the enormous coercive powers of the state. In particular, the PPP targets its critics economically, threatening or removing their source of income. They unhesitatingly fire critics in government employ, as was done with Freddie Kissoon, or actively block offers from non-governmental entities, as was done in relation to Attorney-at-law Gino Persaud, whose offer to be the CEO of a company was withdrawn because of his association with Transparency Institute Guyana. Only in July it was reported that a tourism officer was suspended merely for criticising Dynamic Airways. Thus no position is too high or too low for them to target – the PPP’s strategy is to stifle all critical speech.

In relation to persons privately employed the government has gone so far as to write external agencies to solicit their dismissal, as they did with Carl Greenidge at Caricom and David Hinds at the University of Arizona, to mention just two examples. Self-employed professionals or businessmen critical of the state are discriminatorily targeted by state agencies, most graphically illustrated in the campaign against Kaieteur News and its publisher by GRA, which included the release of private tax information to unauthorised persons.

This government is so rabidly anti-democratic it lashes out even where it has no influence, as happened with the outgoing US ambassador. Brent Hardt’s factual observations were too true and evidently too hurtful, which prompted an indecent dressing-down of him by Priya Manickchand at his own farewell function. The Minister’s performance was so unprecedented and undiplomatic that the ambassador could merely respond: “what a send-off”.

Simultaneously, the PPP has a consistent policy of neutering, undermining or otherwise attempting to destroy various modes of expression at their source, whether print, radio or television. For close to 2 decades the government exercised an unlawful monopoly of the airwaves, which was only relaxed following a court order in 2009. Even so, no action was taken until the eve of national elections in 2011, and then radio licences were unilaterally issued by outgoing President Jagdeo even though a broadcasting authority had by then been set up by law. The lion’s share of radio licences were gifted to PPP members of government, their friends and supporters, while reputable applicants with a track record in journalism and broadcasting were side-lined.

The print media presented a greater challenge, since this had already been freed up by President Hoyte in 1986. Undaunted, the PPP has adopted

several strategies: first, in 2006 all taxpayer-funded state advertising was withdrawn from Stabroek News for seventeen months and all the independent newspapers were again denied state ads from August 2010, in continuing violation of the press freedom it now hypocritically claims to champion. This move was complemented by the issue of a raft of illegal concessions to a private supporter (the Ramroop group of companies) which established a competing newspaper. Other weapons have been used to further cripple freedom and democracy in the media – such as marginalising independent journalists (Gordon Moseley was actually banned from the Office of the President), suspending the licences of independent TV stations, and the frequent resort to and possible misuse of the defamation law by government officials.

In its own operations, the PPP government displays a complete disregard for journalistic ethics and makes no attempt to practise or accommodate ‘representative democracy’. The Chronicle is a vehicle for PPP propaganda, state radio was banned from playing calypsos critical of the government, and when during the budget debates last year a NCN staffer broadcast Cathy Hughes’ speech during prime time, he was fired! This is certainly not the behaviour of a government which subscribes to the principle of the “full and effective exercise of the freedom of the press.”

But perhaps the most obscene aspect of the government’s hypocritical statement is the present experiences of the Kaieteur News newspaper, which bear a chilling comparison to the fate of Charlie Hebdo. We may never know why gunmen stormed the premises of Kaieteur News printer in 2006, killing four of their employees. What we do know is that the current Attorney General, Anil Nandlall, admitted that it is his voice on a recording in which violence against the newspaper was casually contemplated and discussed. According to the voice on tape, not denied to be his by Mr Nandlall, “when you continue to attack people like that and they have no way of responding they gun just walk with their weapon into that same (expletive) Saffon street office and wha come suh do and innocent Peter gun gah pay fuh (expletive) paul in deh one day, me ah tell you innocent, me a tell you honestly man to man that will happen soon.” We have the obscene irony that the nation’s highest law officer expressed his frustration with the operations of one independent newspaper, boasting of his access to far more effective measures than the media or the law in a conversation littered with references to weapons, war, and his alleged warrior status – but who has never faced any public sanction from this government that now claims to subscribe to press freedom!

In these multitude of ways over the past 22 years the PPP has methodically and systematically undermined democracy by a relentless and vindictive assault on press freedom and those who seek to participate in it. This has been accompanied by the outright refusal to even hold local government elections for almost two decades, and now the prorogation of Parliament so as to ensure that their government is not defeated on a no-confidence motion. Unless we are living some version of an Orwellian reality where lies masquerade as truth, the PPP government is a complete stranger to press freedom or democracy. This government should realise the state of its democratic credentials when our former colonial masters are now repeatedly calling on it to hold local government elections and resume Parliament. Instead of issuing any statement on international affairs, which will not be taken seriously by any foreign government or entity, the PPP should examine and condemn its own abysmal record.

Yours faithfully

Arif Bulkan