Kwayana is disturbed
When Mr. Eusi Kwayana fires, his aim is not to disarm but to ensure specific objectives are achieved. Speaker Raphael Trotman of the opposition AFC has justifiably ruled that the Home Affairs Minister has every constitutional legal right to speak in parliament.
No longer would he be subjected to a “Diddle Diddle Dumpling, my son Clement, gagged by the opposition in parliament, with one shoe off, and one shoe on, by Trotman’s grace all now gone”.
The opposition wanted him gagged because of Linden not Agricola. Enter Mr. Kwayana as the supreme judge to hold Mr. Rohee all over again responsible for all Linden’s wickedness where three lives were needlessly lost.
In a letter to the SN on 2/22/13 titled “the lack of comment on Minister Rohee’s conduct after the Linden shooting is disturbing” the ancient Mighty Echo awakens to bring a Daniel to judgement. He wants his pound of flesh. (Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice).
Those commuters, mostly Indian people harassed at Agricola, are not his concern. Has Mr. Kwayana awakened from a sleeping sickness? Or is he sleepless after finding Guyanese apathetic with “the lack of comment on the Minister’s conduct after (finding) the (Linden) shooting is disturbing”?
A commission of Inquiry has met and all evidence has been presented. Why this harkening back hubbub? Mr. Kwayana better be careful. He may be found complicit in the deaths of those Lindeners and guilty for all the destruction inclusive of Agricola.
Mr. Kwayana proclaims that “whenever and wherever there is a fatal shooting by the police, the Minister of Home Affairs cannot be left out”.
So who is guilty of aiding and abetting, organizing, inciting and now disturbingly condoning rioting at Linden and Agricola?
Is the Home Affairs Minister automatically guilty because he is sworn to preserve law and order and also guilty of causing the ensuing mayhem?
California, Kwayana, cannot be clearer than asserting the right to break the law without facing the consequences. Overnight a lawyer, he quotes the Police Act “to me the fact that the Minister was not on the spot is not important. He does not have to be on the spot to be responsible.
The President charged the Minister with responsibility for the police under Article 107. The Minister cannot escape political and constitutional responsibility.
The Police Act says, “The Commissioner shall subject to the general orders and directions of the Minister have the command and supervision of the Force and shall be responsible to the Minister for peace and good order throughout Guyana.” (Section 6).”
Then he does a quick about turn demurringly conceding “this is not on the face of it criminal responsibility. Evidence must establish criminal responsibility.”
Mr. Kwayana is, of course, also, again very disturbed that the PPP/C government democratically held talks with the top leadership of the PNC who control Linden.
Arising from the ashen smoky haze comes forth Mr. Kwayana’s shrill legendary wisdom, after the fact, that the PPP/C government should have dealt directly with the Linden rabble instead of their PNC leaders.
He fumes that the PPP/C “government had been in office for 20 years and should have known the proper (sic) Region 10 authorities to bargain with, rather than bargain with proxies” What makes him more representative and lesser a proxy by this misplaced fretting? Keeping hope or hate alive?
What Mr. Kwayana is questioning is the internal PNC right to decide who legitimately speaks for them.
All Guyanese will come under Mr. Kwayana’s brimstone and fire cognizant that the obvious transparent objective of his fusillade aims directly for a ricochet to eventually target the Linden Commission of Inquiry report. What does the village sage discern peering at his looking glass from afar that so disturbs?