Kaieteur News – All three named above have been part of international teams to observe elections around the world. Roopnaraine went to Nigeria, Alexander to Bolivia and Woolford to the Bahamas. All three gentlemen were in Guyana during the March 2020 election. They became people of interest in relation to the controversy that surrounded the March 2020 election because of their experience as international observers.
It is of immense curiosity to the entire Guyanese nationality, wherever such people are, to have their views of these three persons on the March election. Given their long-standing eminence in Guyana, it would be disheartening to the young Guyanese population if these three personalities choose not to answer. Knowing them, I doubt they would lack courage to expand on the question – do you think the result of the March election, which resulted in a PPP victory, was factual, fair and legal?
Dr. Roopnaraine gave an interview to the online media, Newsroom, during the election impasse in which he thought that it was taking too long to have the results. I don’t see why with 48 years of political activism in Guyana he would refrain from answering the question. Alexander is one of Guyana’s most vocal voices. It would be out of character for him to evade an answer.
When it comes to Woolford, he belongs to the media and headed the NCN during the election drama. It would be confusing and mysterious why he would choose not to respond to the query. In fact, given the accusations made against Woolford in this newspaper by “Kit” Nascimento during the 2020 election campaign, it is predictable that Woolford would offer his opinion.
Readers who missed the exchange between Woolford and Nascimento may be interested in hearing what Nascimento had to say. Here is a quote from a published letter by Nascimento carried by Kaieteur News (Jan 15, 2020): “The issue is that both of the State owned and operated media, the National Communications Network (NCN) and the Guyana Chronicle are being used by government for political propaganda purposes, and this is patently obvious to even the casual observer. In the period of a General Election, this is particularly pernicious. In the case of broadcasting which is supposed to be regulated by the Guyana National Broadcasting Authority (GNBA) to serve the public interest and convenience, it is particularly offensive and is in violation of the licence under which NCN is governed. As I have stated in my letter, “a general election would be neither free nor fair if a contesting party is unfairly denied access to the broadcast media…or a particular party is favoured access to the broadcast media.” The fact remains that the assets of NCN are being used to favour coverage of the APNU+AFC political rallies by comparison with the PPP/C.
In fairness to Woolford, his reply to Nascimento in this newspaper I should highlight. But I have read Woolford’s reply three times (KN, Jan 18, 2020) in typing this column, and I don’t see a direct, unambiguous and pellucid response to the question Nascimento posed. Anyway, here is the most interesting part of Woolford’s reply: “Kit in his usual highbrow attitude called me a few months ago insisting that under “The Fairness Doctrine” I should comply with a request he made. I pointed out that his reference to “The Fairness Doctrine” which is over 30 years old, is obsolete and not applicable in his case.” I have mentioned the Nascimento-Woolford debate to indicate to readers that I don’t think Woolford would lack the courage respond on what were his thoughts on the March election.
This column is about a question to the three gentlemen named above but since we mentioned NCN during the election, let me end with some brief notes about the state media during the reign of APNU+AFC. No manager of any state media house during the no-confidence ramifications, the election campaign and the five-month election impasse could be so contemptuous of the people of Guyana to say they operated within a functionalism that was unbiased and objective. I would reject such a stance immediately.
If the heads of all state media entities – DPI, Chronicle, NCN and NCN Radio – were not removed after Dr. Ali was sworn-in, I would have mounted a one-man vigil and picket on Shiv Chanderpaul Drive until they were removed. Under Presidents Burnham, Hoyte, Janet Jagan (not Cheddi Jagan), Bharrat Jagdeo, Donald Ramotar and David Granger, the state media locked out opposition views in complete and absolute ways. Any manager under those presidents who denied that should be shipped to the circus in Russia.
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)
Apr 13, 2021Kaieteur News – The rapid development taking place in the Ancient County of Berbice continues at a very fast rate with Vitality Inc through the Vitality Foundation coming on board to sponsor a...
Apr 13, 2021
Apr 13, 2021
Apr 13, 2021
Apr 13, 2021
Apr 13, 2021
Kaieteur News – I received several inquiries about my column of Friday, April 2, 2021 titled, “PNC will have to rig... more
Kaieteur News – There are a great number of suspected mentally ill persons walking around the streets of the country.... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – Officials of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)... 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]