Dear Editor,
Over the past months, there has been a clear trend of the Stabroek News – adopting what can be termed a hostile position against the Attorney General and by extension the APNU+AFC administration.
From its refusal to carry my response to Zanna Frank’s allegations in her court challenge case which it had reported extensively on, to the watering-down of my statement on the former Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Legal Affairs, a clear trend can be discerned.
I am not one who criticises the work of the media as I recognise the important role the media play as the Fourth Estate in our democracy. I also know that our Government has stood side by side with the media over the years and will continue to do so. In fact, President David Granger at a media workshop earlier this year said: ”The Government of Guyana is committed to the promotion of a high degree of media professionalism. The administration will not undermine the professionalism of state media workers by subjecting them to political direction or interference in their work.” He added: “Independent media act as watchdogs of Government. They promote transparency by ensuring that information is provided to the public on the work of Government. They are a source of valuable feedback on the effectiveness of the efforts of the Government. There is no good reason for the state to interfere in the work of the private media,” the President declared.
However, when a newspaper of the ‘stature’ of Stabroek News could allow itself to be duped and clearly be used by persons who have ulterior motives, it is a case for much concern. The extant matter before us; the Carmichael Street lands and the misinformation being reported to this nation by the Stabroek News cannot go unnoticed. How can a reputable newspaper (Stabroek News) as it claims it is, publish the kinds of articles it did over the course of this week?- relying solely on ‘sources’ as they claim and not even doing what should be routine in standard journalism-verifying the information they have received.
What further exposes this narrow and weak type of journalism being practised by this newspaper is when instead of checking the Laws of Guyana on the issue of compulsory acquisition; what it sets out and the procedures that ought to be followed it ran along with the line of Anil Nandlall.
A newspaper that was founded by a lawyer- David deCaires, and enjoys the company of several other members of the bar-some at the level of senior counsel ought to have known and done better. As I said in my statement on Thursday “…any lawyer worth his salt would first seek to read the relevant law on the subject and not be hysterical after leaping into darkness.” I now add, any newspaper worth its salt would first seek to read the relevant law on the subject and not be hysterical after leaping into darkness.
There were three separate articles in the Stabroek News last week on the issue of the lands. The first one on Monday headlined ”Ramotar flays move on Riehl’s land; slams AG over claims PPP/C started process.” On Wednesday the newspaper reported: “Cabinet asks AG to explain move to take over private lands” and then on Thursday “Cabinet axes land takeover.”
The first story with former President Donald Ramotar’s reaction I believe I have dealt with it in my statement on Thursday. However, the last two on Wednesday and Thursday expose the blatant fabrication of a national newspaper. On Wednesday Stabroek News reported `Cabinet asks AG to explain the move to take private lands’, quoting a dubious source close to Cabinet. First of all, the AG did not attend Cabinet and his colleagues informed him that there was no discussion or decision on this matter. The State-owned Guyana Chronicle has also reported on this issue, adding that it had verified this with three other Cabinet members.
Less than 24 hours after, Stabroek New reported again on the same Cabinet meeting, this time going even further to say that ‘Cabinet axes land takeover’. Now, isn’t this kind of reporting suspicious, confusing and fabricated. Why would the source not tell Stabroek News on Tuesday after the Cabinet meeting that Cabinet axed the ‘land takeover’, when that would have been the biggest story coming out of the meeting, but rather the newspaper was told the AG was asked to prepare a report and then the next day almost as if it was an afterthought ‘Cabinet axes land takeover’.
I believe it is clear for all to see the level to which some of media houses are willing to stoop in their attempt to embarrass this administration. The Attorney General has since contacted his lawyers and will take the appropriate legal actions to safeguard the integrity of himself, party and government.
Yours faithfully,
Basil Williams
Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs
Editor’s note: It appears that the Attorney General is mistaking professional reporting with hostility. His allegation that Stabroek News did not carry his response to Zanna Frank’s allegations is false. A detailed rebuttal by him was carried in the September 4th edition of SN under the headline `AG denies obstructing Deputy Registrar’s work’. As it relates to his allegation that there was a `watering-down’ of his statement on his former Permanent Secretary it must be stated that this newspaper will only report what it believes can be substantiated and is fair and reasonable. On the question of the Carmichael Street lands, the genesis of the newspaper’s reportage on this matter was an Order under The Acquisition of Lands for Public Purposes (Government Buildings) in an extraordinary issue of The Official Gazette. That order and the way it was perceived by the owners who were targeted validates the newspaper’s reporting of it. As regards the Attorney General’s interest in why the initial report on the Cabinet meeting did not contain information that was carried a day later, this is not an unusual occurrence and is reflective of time constraints and availability of sources. The newspaper stands by its reporting on the Carmichael Street lots and rejects the charges of misinformation and fabrication.
