Dear Editor,
I refer to the SN news item, ‘Shadick unsuited to Pro-Chancellor post – Ifill’ of Jan 26. Dr Ifill is quoted as telling your newspaper in relation to the position of Pro-Chancellor filled by PPP parliamentarian, Bibi Shadick that Ms Shadick’s credentials were read out and though the qualifications sounded impressive they were certainly not fitting for an academic institution.
As someone who spent his entire life studying, analyzing and writing about Guyana, I don’t know about Ms Shadick’s credentials and qualifications. The two terms do not mean the same thing. Credentials include work experience; they are not the same with qualifications. A simple example should suffice. A parliamentarian can achieve the credentials of sitting in twelve parliamentary committees and national commissions on judicial matters. No matter how extensive the experience of that person is, he/she cannot be a judge if he/she is not a lawyer.
I suspect that is what Dr Ifill was referring to when the word ‘credentials’ was used followed immediately by the word ‘qualifications.’ Dr Ifill went on to say that Ms Shadick’s qualifications were not fitting for the post of Pro-Chancellor.
In my study of Guyanese politics I know Ms Shadick to be a lawyer. And I say in all academic honesty, Ms Shadick has not excelled in the practice and writing of law. I know of no legal area of novelty or brilliance of national importance where Ms Shadick has stood out. I do not know of Ms Shadick ever being referred to as a lawyer of national prominence. I know of no popular court trial at either the magisterial or High Court level that Ms Shadick has been involved in.
My knowledge of Ms Shadick is in the area of politics and in the Council of the University. While I was in the Council, Ms Shadick applied for the position of Deputy Registrar. Her application never made the second round. Even her PPP colleagues on the Council did not support her bid. Her tenure as Minister of Social Services was short-lived over remarks made.
Looking at both credentials and qualifications, I am unaware that there are things in there that would qualify Ms Shadick to hold the position of Pro-Chancellor of the University of Guyana. I am subject to correction but I do not believe that Ms Shadick has had any involvement in the world of academia, has ever pursued academic research which has been published, has had the experience of attachment to an academic institution in a research or teaching capacity or did classroom teaching, academic research or publication in her own area of study – law. On what basis then was Ms Shadick chosen to hold an academic position at the University of Guyana?
For those who see the politics and polices of Bharrat Jagdeo as having devastated Guyana, the analysis must include a similar role for Donald Ramotar. I don’t believe the Shadick appointment would not have been mentioned to President Ramotar before the actual event occurred. Let me confess, as someone who functioned for four years with Ms Shadick in the Council, I could never have imagined that Bibi Shadick would be made the Pro-chancellor of UG. Whenever you think this country has hit the lowest point in disgraceful conduct, you wake up to find that we will keep sinking into infinity.
Had I remained as a staff member of UG and was still sitting in the Council representing the trade union, I could never have brought myself to remain in the meeting while Ms Shadick presided. In life, you draw the line at some point where something becomes totally unacceptable to you. For me, the Bibi Shadick Pro-Chancellor appointment at UG is the last straw.
Yours faithfully,
Frederick Kissoon
