UG lecturer Evan Persaud cleared on allegations

-to be reinstated with stern warning

University of Guyana (UG)  lecturer Evan Radhay Persaud, who was accused of victimizing students and engaging in sex talk during lectures, was cleared of the allegations yesterday after a committee set up to investigate the claims found a lack of evidence.

Evan Radhay Persaud

The University Council has accepted the findings of the committee pending a verification of the report prepared; one of the committee members did not sign the report.

Persaud is to be re-instated as a lecturer with a stern warning and he is to be supervised when he resumes duty. Previously, he was suspended after the University Council had conducted an initial probe and concluded that there was sufficient evidence against him to warrant a wider investigation. Persaud could not be reached last evening for comment on the probe.

Stabroek News was reliably informed by sources yesterday that the committee set up to investigate the allegations against Persaud found nothing substantial against him, in addition to a string of inconsistent reports from the students who made the allegations.

The students who had initially complained to the University Council “backed down” when approached by the committee, a source said, and the complaints fell apart.

The source said the committee was left with allegations which were not holding up with the exception of a few. One of the complaints which was valid related to a recording of Persaud where he was abusive to a student, but the committee found that this behaviour was not excessive based on the findings of the investigation.

According to the source, a member of the University Council openly stated that the committee could have conducted the investigation more carefully. However, there were a string of issues with the committee including the disclosure yesterday that the terms of reference for the committee were not clear. The source said council debated whether to appoint a new committee setting up clearer terms of references and guidelines but many persons questioned the wisdom of this. According to the source, appointing a new committee gives the impression that the Council is seeking to have a “particular outcome to the case”.

“This case had shortcomings, there were clear shortcomings with the committee and with those who made the complaints. What is turned out to be was that many of these students did not stand up”, the source said. However, the source observed that Persaud deserves to be treated fairly, adding that if students object to his behaviour in a very public manner then they ought to speak out when they are approached.

According the source, no evidence could also be garnered from the Faculty of Technology to support allegations that Persaud did not administer grades on time and that he breached the rules of the university.

In letters to University Registrar Vincent Alexander, students alleged last year that Persaud had victimised and intimidated them, particularly those sponsored by a mining company. One student related that on the first day in class, Persaud told them, “Leave y’all God at the [expletive] door,” saying that he was god in the classroom. Further, the student charged that most of the time spent in class was “sex talking time.”

The student also reported that a 2008 examination supervised by Persaud had been held at a city hotel and students who opposed this were victimised.

Student Ganesh Mahipaul, one of those who accused Persaud, had raised concerns about the pending report of the committee. He told Stabroek News earlier this year he was deeply concerned about the persons sitting on the committee probing Persaud’s appeal since according to him the panel was made up of people who were politically oriented. “This concerns me,” he said. He said the lecturer had a reputation in class for “playing up” his political connections, “which is why I am concerned.”

He recalled that some 18 students complained against the lecturer and had initially submitted a report to the university.  In its report, the students raised a number of issues, among them the conduct of the lecturer in the classroom.