![]() |
| WALTER RODNEY 25th ANNIVERSARY COMMEMORATION COMMITTEE |
|
|
|
Floods In Guyana ( A brief history) David Hinds: Race and Political Discourse in Guyana
Women Against Violence Everywhere |
PEEPING
TOM
MISTAKE! The PPP was not the only casualty of the vote on the parliamentary motion calling for an inquiry into the death of Dr. Walter Rodney. The PNCR has made a colossal political mistake in the first place by calling for an inquiry. You will recall that just before celebrations of the twenty-fifth anniversary of the assassination of Dr. Walter Rodney, the PNCR, mindful of the political pressure that it would face during the commemorative groundings, called for an inquiry into the death of Rodney. This call came a quarter of a century too late. For years, the WPA and Rodney's widow had been pleading with the late Desmond Hoyte to a launch a commission of inquiry into the historian's death. This never happened. Nor has the PNCR ever owned up to the role of the PNC in the murder of Walter Rodney. Even in calling for a commission of inquiry, a move tantamount to placing the burden onto the PPP, the PNCR did not come clean about it's past, and declare what it knew or knows about Rodney's death. For this reason, the PNCR's call for a commission of inquiry did not generate a great deal of political interest. The call was more-or- less viewed as political gimmickry, especially since it had come at a time when the main suspect had died after hiding for close to twenty-five years. The PNCR did not understand what it was doing. It may have been hoping that the PPP would not have arranged a commission of inquiry, and this could have been used to embarrass the PPP. And the PNCR may have genuinely felt, that with Gregory Smith out of the way, there was no way that Rodney's assassination could be pinned on the Founder Leader of the PNCR. The PNCR is wrong. It has been revealed that there is now a key witness, who claimed to be an operative within the Burnham government. This person has reportedly given a statement implicating the Burnham regime in the murder of Rodney. The PNCR may have also been hoping that the passage of time may have weakened the evidence available. Well, the WPA has some evidence that can pose problems for the PNCR. The WPA has said that it is aware of who went to the United States to purchase the anti-personnel device used to kill Rodney. By agreeing to the commission of inquiry into the death of Rodney and in not at the same time agreeing to the specific scope of the investigation, the PNCR is about the bury Burnham deeper in his political grave. This August will mark twenty years since the death of the former President who rigged elections to keep himself in power. It may be the last occasion that the PNCR will have to invoke the memory of Burnham, because when the commission of inquiry is finished, so much additional harm will be done to Burnham's memory that even his most ardent supporters will want to distance themselves from anything associated with the late dictator. The PNCR has not learnt from the commission of inquiry into the death squad allegations. The PNCR had led a campaign to force an inquiry as to whether the former Minister of Home Affairs had been involved in extra- judicial killings. The PNCR marched and protested, but the government would not budge. It was only because of the international diplomatic community and Uncle Freddie that forced the government to eventually agree to a commission of inquiry. Gajraj, has in a recent interview with Cecil Griffith, lashed out at the PNCR and Uncle Freddie for not volunteering to appear before the commission of inquiry. He has, in so doing, been attributing to the PNCR, a victory for which it does not deserve credit. The PNCR was critical of the limited terms of reference of the commission of inquiry established by Jagdeo. And they must have been surprised at the many issues that the commission was able to examine within such a limited term of reference. Not only did the commission examine Gajraj's relationship with Axel Williams, it also examined his role in the issuing of gun licenses. I am saying now that the parliamentary motion voted on last Wednesday by the PNCR, gives great latitude to Bharrat Jagdeo in scripting the terms of reference for the commission of inquiry into Rodney's death. And do you think Jagdeo is going to be swayed from not ensuring that the terms of reference covers not only the actual event that led to Rodney's death, but also the circumstances that preceded Rodney's assassination? He is not going to be dissuaded since this has a direct bearing on why Rodney was killed. When the commission of inquiry, prompted on by its terms of reference and nudged by the lawyers appearing for the State and WPA, begins to elaborate on the situation that Rodney confronted when he returned to Guyana, Burnham's name is going to be sullied. The inquiry will have to address the issue of Rodney's denial of employment, as well as the campaign of terror that the opposition party faced in those days. The PNCR is saying let the chips fall where they will. And the PNCR must therefore accept responsibility when the chips fall on Burnham and those that were involved in planning and executing Rodney's murder. Last Wednesday, Jagdeo received a political gift from the PNCR. The report of the commission of inquiry will be so damaging to the party of Forbes Burnham, that Jagdeo is going to easily win next year's election. I just hope that the PNCR does not try to make others scapegoats for its own mistakes. The PNCR called for a commission of inquiry into Rodney's death; it voted in the National Assembly for the establishment of such a commission. In agreeing to the amended motion last Wednesday, the PNCR has given Bharrat Jagdeo a blank cheque to determine the precise wording of the terms of reference of the commission of inquiry. And Jagdeo is not the type to bypass such a golden political opportunity.
|