Dear Editor,
Response is made to Barrington Braithwaite’s letter, `Lindeners opposing Granger have not stated what he is not doing to make their lives better,’Stabroek News 23rd October, 2014. It is unfortunate that Braithwaite in seeking to justify the PNCR use of the police to deny its members/supporters entry to a publicly advertised meeting sought to make reference to an unnamed trade unionist who called out the Black Clothes police on its striking members. Without naming the trade unionist he claims committed this act, it is a deceptive and wicked attempt to link me as the person involved in this activity or a party to such action.
Issues of fundamental rights and respecting the rule of law in all spheres of life are sacred to me. None is held as a sacred cow in ensuring these universal principles are upheld.
Let us not confuse the issue in Linden. The current issue in Linden is a PNCR matter between the Party Leadership and the members. This is not an APNU matter; it happens that the APNU leader also wears the cap of PNCR leader. The organisations should not be confused neither should the issue be conflated, even though the latter can have a great impact on the former, given that the PNCR is the major party in the APNU coalition.
In civilized and progressive societies citizens’ rights and the rule of law form the centrepiece. Any leader who offers himself for public office must be prepared to be evaluated based on these internationally accepted principles. The issue in Linden is a systemic one and must be addressed within this context.
Granger has offered himself for public office and projected to this country that he is the president in waiting. As such he can and must be evaluated by every citizen, equally as the same yardstick being used for Donald Ramotar. Braithwaite has serious concerns with the way the PPP manages the affairs of state, where the administration disregards time-honoured principles, flagrantly violates laws and transgresses the rights of citizens.
Granger in dealing with his constituents should be held to the same standards of evaluation and criticisms where necessary.
As a nation we cannot engage in double standards if we desire to right the wrongs happening in our society. If what the PPP is doing is wrong, when Granger does the same thing it cannot be right.
Right is right and wrong is wrong, regardless of who commits it. This society must be prepared to hold their leaders accountable, across the board, consistent with global trends, if we are to hold our rightful place in the 21st century.
The issue in Linden requires solutions and these can only be arrived at by constructive engagement across the table. Granger as leader of the party and president–in-waiting has a greater responsibility to roll up his sleeves and get down into the community and engage the people. His is a greater responsibility to deliver leadership and bring resolution to grievances of the members in the party he was elected to serve.
All over the world we have had experiences when leaders refuse to listen to the cries of the people there have been revolts in the streets.
This issue is not whether Granger is right or wrong. This issue is the need to uphold time-honoured principles. There must be talks between the parties if differences are to be resolved. Centring the issue around Vanessa Kissoon, Sharma Solomon and a few others, and labelling persons, and asking that if those who have opposed Granger can state what he has done to make their lives better, will not bring about a resolution. There is a general view among Lindeners that Granger’s leadership has brought pain and anguish to their lives. He has a responsibility to change that view. The residents in Linden have said publicly and on more than one occasion that any act committed in their community and/or on their behalf must be guided by the party rules, national constitution and respect for their rights. And it is within this context I spoke about Linden being the cradle of the revolution. The march has commenced. Rather than trying to stop the march for respecting rights and delivering justice, Granger is presented an opportunity to nurture a progressive step that is gathering momentum and global appreciation. The militancy of Lindeners can be used as a catalyst for change and a weapon in Granger’s armoury in the nation’s fight to bring about good governance, respect for the rule of law and citizens’ rights.
Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis
