Dear Editor,
I found it extremely odd that President Bharrat Jagdeo would be out of the country – one blog reported he was scheduled to appear at a social function in New York on Saturday, May 3 – at the same time when Guyanese workers publicly observed Labour Day on May 1, and at the same time when the Guyana Government sponsored a Media and Communication Conference on May 2.
Traditionally in Guyana, Labour Day observances have been used by political and labour leaders to make profound statements and stake out strategic positions on a variety of political, social and economic issues. Call it a day for political posturing and grandstanding.
Both the late Forbes Burnham and Cheddi Jagan, Sr, seemingly always made it their duty to join the longsuffering workers of Guyana at this annual event. Burnham as Prime Minister and then President and titular head of the GLU, made his usual speeches about the state-controlled economy, international issues, and their collective impact on workers.
Jagan, as PPP and Opposition Leader and titular head of the sugar workers union, GAWU, made speeches critical of the Burnham regime’s policies and their adverse impact on workers.
President Jagdeo, up until now, seemed to have kept faith with the tradition of showing up and making his expected pronouncements on labour-related issues. But then came his shocking no-show this year!
Now, what can be so much more important at this particular time that the President must be out of Guyana, rather than showing solidarity with workers on Labour Day?
Was he out of the country inking a new deal that can benefit workers? Or did he get word of a planned shouting down or heckling by workers had he shown up, so he decided to send Prime Minister Sam Hinds, who was forced to leave the rally by angry working class folks?
For a government that prides itself as ‘working class,’ something is amiss for angry sugar workers in Berbice and angry public servants in Georgetown to be railing against the same government. Is the PPP paying attention? Does the PPP care at all?
Then there was the government-sponsored conference in recognition of World Press Freedom Day, which came only a few weeks after the President decided to withdraw his ridiculous ban on state ads to Stabroek News and coincided with the President’s ill-advised decision recently to suspend CN Sharma’s TV transmitting licence. How ironic!
Did the President get word that since WPFD was an internationally promoted event that he, being the head of state and also with ministerial responsibility for communications and information, should have been the ideal person to put a policy spin on its launching? If so, then is it possible that rather than appearing hypocritical for promoting press freedom while his government has been doing the exact opposite, he decided to high-tail it overseas?
And what’s up with HPS, Dr Roger Luncheon, standing in for the President, telling local media operatives that “political consensus is needed to [further?] enhance press freedom”? I’m surprised his listeners didn’t heckle him by pointing out that there is already a political consensus in Guyana that the state must end its monopoly on radio in an effort to enhance press freedom.
According to the Guyana Chronicle, Dr Luncheon also reportedly said at the conference, “that ownership of the media is overwhelmingly in the hands of the private media and this can have repercussions for press freedom.” What on earth is he talking about?
Now, isn’t it strange that in more developed democracies that the ownership of the media is overwhelmingly in the hands of private folks, yet there are no repercussions for press freedom there? Conversely, isn’t it also strange that in developing countries, like Guyana, where there is no Freedom of Information law, and where the state seeks to exert control or influence over private media outlets, that the risks for repercussions are greater?
Unless he had very good reason to be out of the country this past weekend, President Jagdeo probably knew why he was a no-show at both aforementioned events. First, he likely would have been heckled by workers on Labour Day, and second, he likely would have added nothing new to the discussion on press freedom in Guyana, especially given his dismal track record.
Yours faithfully,
Emile Mervin
