Latest update April 19th, 2024 12:59 AM
Oct 04, 2012 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom
Following the assassination of Walter Rodney, the Forbes Burnham regime lost the standing that it had previously enjoyed in Africa as a result of its consistent opposition to apartheid. One year after the death of Rodney, Burnham made a grandstand move that was viewed as an attempt to regain his declining international credibility.
In 1981, the English cricket team was touring the Caribbean and one of its members was a gentleman who now commentates on cricket worldwide.
Robin Jackman was a member of the then English cricket team and after his arrival in Guyana for the Second Test Match, Burnham took the decision that he was persona non grata and would not be allowed to play in Guyana because he had played and coached in South Africa.
The basis that Burnham used for his decision was the Gleneagles Agreement to which Guyana was a signatory. This agreement urged governments to take measures to discourage its nationals from having sporting ties with South Africa.
Burnham, in his attempt to regain credibility with the African liberation movements, attempted to stretch the interpretation of this agreement by banning foreign nationals who played or coached in South Africa from playing in Guyana. Prior to this, the government had not stated its intentions.
There were strong objections to this move against Robin Jackman by the government, since it was seen as going beyond the scope of the Gleneagles Agreement, which was merely intended for governments to discourage their own nationals from having sporting ties with South Africa and which was not seen as a means of imposing sanctions of the nationals of other countries.
The English Cricket Board refused to drop Jackman for the Guyana Test, insisting that the move prejudiced its team selection, which it felt was solely the responsibility of the team and Board and not for governments to dictate.
Burnham’s action found support with other Commonwealth countries, with India indicating that it would not allow players who had played in South Africa to be part of an English tour to that country. India later relented after two of the concerned players expressed their opposition to apartheid and after the English Cricket Board restated its position as regards team selection.
Later a number of Guyanese cricketers were part of what was described as a “Rebel Cricket Tour” to South Africa. It was widely assumed that because of this they were banned from playing for both Guyana and the West Indies.
Yet no law was ever passed in Guyana banning these cricketers and not many can recall if the Guyana cricket authorities had indicated, as a matter of policy, prior to the Rebel Tour, that local nationals who went to play cricket in South Africa would not be allowed to play domestic cricket, represent Guyana or be eligible for selection to West Indies cricket.
Such was the nature of the political dictatorship of the time, that Burnham’s word was law and no one wanted to challenge any edict from Burnham, whether it was constitutional or not. Burnham was a law unto himself.
It would, however, be interesting if those who had knowledge of those days could indicate whether there was ever any ban on these players and the basis on which any such ban was imposed.
This issue is recalled because just recently in the electronic media, there was a disturbing report about some staff members of the country’s national airport being banned from employment there. It may have been the media’s way of saying that the individuals were dismissed and would not be re-employed. But the report spoke of a ban.
The labour laws of Guyana do not provide for employment bans. And this is why it is important that the authorities at the airport indicate whether in fact such a ban was imposed as was reported in the electronic media.
The airport authorities have discretion in deciding who to employ, but they do not have any authority whatsoever to ban anyone from being employed at the airport, more so if that person was never convicted of an offence. In short, no person can be banned from being employed anywhere in Guyana.
It is understandable that the airport authorities have to be concerned about who works at the airport. And they can decide who they will employ, but they cannot ban anyone. As such, they should issue a disclaimer about banning of workers.
No one can be banned from finding work. There may be constructive bans, in the sense that the persons may not find favour with certain employers, but no one can be banned from finding a job in Guyana so long as that person is a national.
Please share this to every Guyanese including your house cats.
Apr 19, 2024
SportsMax – West Indies Women’s captain Hayley Matthews delivered a stellar all-round performance to lead her team to a commanding 113-run victory over Pakistan Women in the first One Day...Kaieteur News – For years, the disciples of Bharrat Jagdeo have woven a narrative of economic success during his tenure... 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]