Proceedings in our House of Assembly are usually fairly turgid, except when they are enlivened by the occasional witticism, such as when Minister Kellawan Lall rose to his feet to speak on Monday, and Ms Debbie Backer called out to her fellow parliamentarians, “Duck!” But it was not just Ms Backer last week who provided some relief from the otherwise dreary speechifying; none other than the Minister of Home Affairs himself made a contribution which, if it did not exactly cause hilarity among the assembled MPs, at least captured their immediate attention.
Now Mr Clement Rohee is not a man known for his sense of humour; in fact the tenor of his speeches and his general demeanour are invariably grave. So when he told Parliament on Monday that law and order was being kept at an “optimal level” by the law enforcement agencies, the opposition, at least, must have wondered at first whether he was behaving out of character, and had actually delivered himself of a jocular remark. But any such thought would have been fleeting, because it was soon apparent that he was his usual solemn, earnest self.
As we reported on Tuesday, the Minister also told the House, “There is no breakdown of law and order in Guyana. If you want to talk about breakdown in law and order, then you have to look at Afghanistan, Somalia and Haiti to some extent, or the Mexican city of Tijuana…” He was quoted as going on to say, “There is no, I insist, no breakdown of law and order in Guyana. I am not saying that because I’m the Minister of Home Affairs, I’m saying that because like you and like everyone over here we live in this country and we can walk about this country, we can work, we can have fun, we can have leisure, we can do all we want to do in this country without looking over our shoulders as we used to do prior to 1992.”
One might have thought that all of this would have been a bit much to swallow, even for some on the government side, but if any of them had private reservations they did not reveal them publicly, and dutifully applauded their parliamentary colleague with the enthusiasm which their party seems to require for such occasions.
The citizens of some parts of the coastland in particular (and that unquestionably includes the PPP’s own constituents), must be wondering whether Mr Rohee lives in Bora Bora, rather than within the boundaries of the 83,000 square miles where they make their home. There is no point here in itemising for the Minister’s benefit some of the many horrendous crimes which have so compromised the security of ordinary people, although a few of our letter-writers did just that last week; however, it is worth observing that if the Minister thinks the only standard required for deeming the security situation “optimal” is that it has not degenerated to the level of Somalia or Tijuana, then he doesn’t have a grip on what his portfolio involves at all. And the fact that people still go to work, etc, does not mean there is no problem of law and order. The citizenry has no patience for his pedantry with respect to the word ‘breakdown’; even if there is not a complete breakdown in the literal sense, everyone (except, perhaps the Minister?) knows there is a breakdown at some level.
Furthermore, he cannot persuade anyone who was around at the time that things were worse before 1992; it simply was not so. It is certainly true that for a period at the end of the Burnham era there were ‘kick-down-the-door’ bandits, but after Hoyte acceded to office in 1985, he wasted no time in dealing with them – and he did so very effectively. In addition, while there were drugs around, the trade had not at that stage reached the dimensions it has now, and had not undermined the society at all levels as it has now. Most of all, there were very few guns in circulation, and while people were still robbed and burgled, they were generally not shot dead in the process. Today every petty thief either owns, or has rented a gun, and – perhaps sometimes under the influence of cocaine – is prepared to kill a victim for trivial sums of money or a cellphone. People of all ethnicities and political persuasions know from personal experience or observation that the proliferation of guns is a phenomenon which has come in fairly recent times under the present government. How come the Minister of Home Affairs, of all people, is conveying the impression that he is not aware of this?
And Mr Rohee can talk blue cheese, but he will have a hard job persuading citizens – especially his party’s constituents – that the police are effective in dealing with crime. He has been belaboured before on the fact that there is no DEA office here, that the British project involving assistance in reforming the security sector was rejected and that his administration has ignored the recommendations contained in various reports, etc. What he has opted to do in the past to demonstrate his government’s willingness to deal with crime, is to emphasize the money which has been spent on upgrading the equipment of the Guyana Police Force. While it is certainly true that the security services cannot perform ‘optimally’ if they are not equipped to do so (and there are still lacunae in some areas), that in and of itself is not enough. It doesn’t matter how many new vehicles the police have if when a citizen calls 911, no one answers, or if the phone is answered, the response comes hours after the bandits have departed.
It doesn’t matter to the average citizen either how many long guns are issued to the police if in the end crimes of violence – as in the Sheema Mangar case – are not solved. As far as the ordinary man and woman is concerned (and more especially the small businessperson) bandits are not caught with any great regularity. Of course the police force is seriously under-strength which will impede its ability to function effectively; its members are certainly underpaid, which does not put them beyond the temptation of petty bribes, let alone what the drug traffickers can offer; and in the critical area of crime investigation, some of its officers do not appear to be adequately trained. In addition, the allegations of torture have done nothing to enhance the GPF’s reputation. In short, citizens feel insecure, and believe that they are not being afforded sufficient protection by the police.
Now if it is really the case that the Minister of Home Affairs thinks that the residents of Canje, say, (to take the most recent instance) have no justification for feeling that they are under siege, then there is a serious problem; it would mean that he is totally divorced from the reality and oblivious to the experience and perceptions of the citizens of this country. That alone would disqualify him from occupying the post he currently holds. One suspects, however, that he is not in fact guilty of living in a fantasy world; rather he was just relieving himself of the usual political polemic in response to criticisms from the opposition. If so, what he said did him and his office no credit.
Parliament is not a secret chamber; what is said there potentially can be reported in the media, and on subjects like crime, will invariably be reported in the media. In any case, the House (in addition to its primary function) is one of the forums which allow the public to be informed about what the government is doing, and what criticisms the opposition has to offer on the administration’s performance. Mr Rohee has no right, therefore, to treat the citizenry with such disdain; they are owed some kind of meaningful statement from a government representative. Of course, there will be some rhetoric in any minister’s response, but at least a defence should take into account the population’s real concerns, and attempt to address these in a more rational way. Just to deny them outright is to imply that the Ministry of Home Affairs has no idea whatsoever exactly what it should do about the crime situation.
