Dear Editor,
As we now know, look for the words of the prophet between the raindrops.
Danuta Radzik pulled no punches in her somewhat searing and forthright account on the present state of affairs in her missive, ‘We do not want to revert to a security apparatus which is covert and targets the children of civilians’ (SN, Jan 12). What Ms Radzik addressed, though dishearteningly true, for me was good because of the letter’s honesty and boldness. It was not a flattering approach, nor did she join the bandwagon with that now worn refrain: “Give them time, deh just get in”. Neither can she be accused of being anti anything; she is just plain straight-up on observations. You know as time goes by I can’t help saying how we seem more and more ‘cooking with smoke’ as we await the Rodney CoI report. And by the way, in passing I can’t help thinking how weird some of us can be; hear this upside down reasoning: “Look forget about inquiry, Rodney dead over 35 years ago, half the people in this country don’t know anything about he”, while in the same breath they honour the Enmore Martyrs of 68 years ago and seek to sanctify the Son Chapman event of 51 years ago ‒ just making a point. Boy oh boy, why do we strain at a fly and swallow a camel?
Editor, Ms Radzik has some searching questions for the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU). She writes: “… I do not accept that money stolen, acquired or received through ill-gotten means or embezzlement trumps murder, femicides, rape, sexual exploitation, robbery under arms and other serious crimes. So I want to know where is the SOCU for these crimes? Where is the SOCU for women murdered or at risk of being murdered by their intimate partners? Where is the SOCU for the numerous reports of child sexual abuse being delayed and unprosecuted through inadequate and poor police investigation leading to rapists and paedophiles walking free while children of such injustices descend into lives of despair and criminality?”
Where is the SOCU investigating Guyanese women/men brutalised and beaten, robbed, set afire, sexually abused and humiliated by predators and criminals, many themselves young and who themselves are for the most part victims of poverty, illiteracy, unemployment, abuse, neglect and a criminal underworld? Then she stitches in a “slam dunk”: “Why are there so many families who continue to experience cyclical and intergenerational poverty without any hope in sight? Why is it that consultations on national issues always seems as a matter of course to discriminate against those categories of persons with little normative or institutional power, while never failing to ensure that others who are recognised as having defacto power and societal influence continue to be well consulted, well financed and listened to?
Editor, I doubt if there are immediate answers to these questions; the trouble is, they have never occupied the front burner and so the line of focus; but really, that’s the tragedy with poverty ‒ who cares about the lesser mortals.
And we do need more voices coming forth as one on the question of principle, right and wrong and fair play. And I hope we can prove Freddie Kissoon wrong when he referred to us as “the most frightened people on planet earth.” In fact I think we are good at doing daring, diabolical things, so long as they do not stand even remotely in direct confrontation with the reign of power. Oh! don’t we need a SOCU to tail that “rampant gold smuggling” ‒ 15,000 ounces of precious gold ‒ that skips across the ocean weekly as was stated by the Minister in charge? Indeed, as the Stabroek News editorial described it, “it is an economic crime of monumental proportions…”
Yours faithfully,
Frank Fyffe
