Dear Editor,
I enclose a duplicate of a letter that three of us sent to the Minister of Culture, Youth and Sport, dated October 5, 2013, outlining the numerous flaws associated with the selected design for the proposed 1838 Indian Arrival Day monument.
A copy of the letter, dated November 14, 2013, was sent to the President of Guyana. We received a reply two weeks later from his confidential secretary saying the matter had been referred to the Minister of Culture and that he had been directed to send a response.
Editor, to date we have received no response from the Minister of Culture, and in excess of sixty working days have elapsed.
Organizations and institutions that represent the welfare of Indian people find it very challenging to accept a design of so little merit.
We would like to know why a sum of five hundred thousand dollars was awarded for a design that contradicts even the definition of the word monument. And we would like to know why the model was not made public after selection.
Using a design copied from a monument in Suriname has degraded our people.
A design that is fundamentally flawed ought not to be erected, since this structure or symbol would stand for hundreds of years and be viewed by hundreds of thousands of people.
Yours faithfully,
Muneshwar Rup
