Annan Boodram does not work for the Government of Guyana and therefore cannot be accused of providing tactical support or being guilty by association. And since I’m on record as being critical of the PPP/C government I cannot be accused of consenting (by silence) to the pathologies that exist.
Now as I said before, I have no reason to challenge the credentials of Clarence Ellis, or the anecdotes of those who knew and worked with him and who assert that he stood up for what he believed in as far as his technical expertise was concerned. However my research has indicated that at no time, either as a highly placed technocrat within the PNC government or as a commentator abroad, did Clarence Ellis speak out against or even acknowledge rigged elections. In fact none of the anecdotes by his various associates, colleagues and friends have alluded to any of this. So whether it is guilt by association, consent by silence, denial of reality or however else characterized, Clarence Ellis belongs to that pantheon of highly credentialled Guyanese who accepted rigged elections and whose roles are being sanitized in an attempt to revise history. Incidentally these are all arguments (guilt by association, consent by silence, denial of reality) that are used by critics of the PPP government to find guilty, all and sundry who are or have been associated with the government or who deem to point out aspects of reality that are ignored or downplayed by these critics.
Now if Dr C Kenrick Hunte (‘An unsubstantiated allegation should not be made against someone who has died’ SN, May 1) or any other person can point to facts that prove me wrong then I would most willingly accept my error and issue an apology. Otherwise Dr Hunte owes me an apology for questioning my integrity as a journalist and media professional and for accusing me of hypocrisy, based on the allegation that I wait “until someone dies, then accuse the deceased of something he did not do, knowing he cannot respond.” So for Dr Hunte’s information, I did pose the question to Mr Ellis in an email correspondence but he provided no answer. I also mentioned this issue in a letter to the Guyana media quite a while back, but Mr Ellis did not respond then either.
In effect, Editor, what is indeed troubling is that in rushing to defend their friends, colleagues and associates, some individuals impugn the character of others based on mere assumptions.