Latest update April 25th, 2024 12:59 AM
Aug 23, 2014 Letters
DEAR EDITOR,
Even though a dangerous game of overt political calumny is unfolding during the Rodney Commission of Inquiry, I am of the opinion that the process is useful in helping us to better understand the political evolution of Guyana. However, for the specific objective of inquiring into the untimely demise of Walter Rodney, the Commission of Inquiry (COI) seems to cough up more questions than our collective ability to answer.
I have questions concerning both, the strategy and procedures of the commission itself, as well as uninvestigated theories that are both plausible and practicable.
From my layman’s observation of the legal happenings at this COI, counsel for the commission (I thought) ought to be neutral actors helping to collect and clarify statements of witnesses and process all other information and documents coming into the possession of the commission. To the contrary, the attorneys for the commission seem to be bunny-hopping between being neutral inquest scribes and aggressive prosecutors.
Him being both affable and approachable, I engaged Mr. Hanoman (one of the counsel for the COI) with my concerns about his (seeming) prosecutorial posture. He asked me to give instances that lead to my conclusion and I did. In the most unassuming manner he accepted that on one occasion he may have unintentionally come over that way. In his own defence he said that a particular witness was being unnecessarily and (to his mind) purposefully difficult with bouts of uncooperative posture and his fierce lawyer instincts got the better of him. He further stated that he was upbraided by the COI’s Chairman during the break that followed and he has since been extremely careful with his interrogation.
After my rendezvous with Mr. Hanoman, I reviewed documents from several sittings along with what I witnessed during several sittings where I was present or listened on the radio, and I am convinced that his slip-ups (or slip-downs depending on how you look at it) were too frequent to give him a one-time passover.
The style and demeanour of Ms. Rahaman (the other counsel for the commission) is not dissimilar to that of Mr. Hanoman, however she has an added strange panegyric daily rakish recitation exclusively on NCN about each day’s sitting, taking extreme care to explain away and oblivionize the submissions and objections of the accredited counsel standing in the interest of their clients, especially those of Mr. Basil Williams.
I urge both counsel to be extremely circumspect for the remainder of the life of this COI if they are to avoid a stain on their credibility and professionalism.
The other issue I have is the failure on the part of the commission to seriously consider and pursue credible alternative theories to the already age-old popularly received theories surrounding the death of Dr. Rodney. As adumbrated by the chair of the COI, the three theories under consideration by the COI are;
1. Rodney knew that Smith could create explosives and that he was reckless with his life.
2. The state directed Smith to deliver and detonate explosives to Rodney.
3. Smith delivered explosives to Rodney not knowing it to be so, while high state and security officials plotted the entire scheme and used Smith as their playing pawn.
At the last sitting, Mr. Williams introduced a fourth theory, that Rodney could have been killed under the auspice of the PPP, and he posits that they had an interest in his demise. The commission plainly stated that they are not ready to give serious consideration to that notion since it is merely “possible but not probable”. Eh, fuh real?
I think the commission runs the risk of hasty pandering to already accepted beliefs – beliefs, not unvarnished facts, which is tantamount to rounding up and convicting any known person who was in prior trouble with the law for sheep every time a sheep is missing; on the other hand, overlooking the fowl thief who may have graduated to sheep or that uncanny uncharacteristic one-off sheep snatcher.
Considering the size of expenditure on this COI and that this may be the only opportunity to get the full and complete rendering of all of permutations involved in this event, no stones should be left unturned, no theory circumvented.
Has anyone stopped to ask why only after 21 years in government that a full COI is being done and why the original 1996 inquest was aborted? Is it that the PPP saw that in 1996, fingers would be pointing at it, and thus needed time to wipe its tracks, cleverly destroying all incriminating information as evidenced by missing files and numerous documents repudiated as being forged?
Crime Chief James testified that over time, files (probably the missing ones also) were passed from hand to hand among top PPP operatives in and out of the defence board. Is it that the PPP (the possible unlikely one-off sheep snatcher) is sufficiently satisfied that they have wiped their tracks and the world is now left to round up the usual suspect?
Can somebody explain why, even though the commission specifically requested files on Police intelligence on all opposition parties none was forthcoming about the PPP, except for a few passing references in the WPA files?
My next question is, even though the police stated that intelligence was gathered on the ruling party (at the time) no file was requested, aren’t these files important in telling us whether there were traitors, coconspirators, rouges and infiltrators capable of having a hand in Rodney’s demise cleverly attributing blame to the state?
I understand the pain of the Rodney family and WPA operatives like Ms. DeSouza, Bro. Ogunseye, Elder Eusi, Fr. Rodrigues and so many others who were directly impacted and directly pained by his death, but their theory-based misgivings, personal and collective convictions and calculated surmising ought not to be the only story nor the overarching premise upon which the COI renders its deliberations.
Too many stones may be left unturned and those of us (from a younger generation) who seek an objective historical perspective may forever be robbed of the real truth. The results of the COI becomes useless, regurgitating the same old, inconclusive theories we have heard since my childhood with no new angles, no real substance, a farce, a mockery, a waste of tax dollars.
Finally, I wish to put it to the commission and to the nation that Western external forces had a strong and overtly expressed (cold war) interest in purging the Caribbean region of socialist radicals and revolutionaries, among whom Rodney was a leading light. Could it be that Western Intelligence actors would have infiltrated the local intelligence operatives under the guise of offering collaborative advice, expertise and supervision, may have executed their plan to cut off Rodney leaving the state to clean up the mess left behind? Is it a case of someone happening upon a murder-in-progress and being caught with the knife in his hand after the real murderer escaped? Did we make any efforts to request from and search for declassified (or open cooperation) US and British Government files that may speak to the death of Rodney? Do we know for sure that this mysterious Russian at the Pegasus wasn’t a Western agent posing as a Russian?
Please Guyana, please Commissioners, please counsel for the COI, please WPAites, please PNCites, oh please Government of Guyana, let us have a complete thorough and unbiased COI. Let us avoid the path of pinning the blame on the village bully, the usual suspect.
I hold no brief for the PNC nor is this an attempt to absolve the state from blame, but I believe it will do the Rodney family, the nation and our history a great disservice if after the end of the COI, young inquiring minds continuously point to glaring stones left unturned and dismiss the validity of the commission’s conclusions.
Lenno Craig
Jagdeo giving Exxon 102 cent to collect 2 cent.
Apr 25, 2024
By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – The French Diplomatic Office in Guyana, in collaboration with the Guyana Olympic Association and UNICEF, hosted an exhibition on Tuesday evening at the...Kaieteur News – Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo, the General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party, persists in offering... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]