Vox pop: Antigua election date
We can hear from their protestations on the campaign platform and in media and we can see from their many social media postings each of the two major parties in Antigua and Barbuda is blaming the other side with regard to the announcement of the election date. But what do the people of Antigua and Barbuda believe? What are your views? Which party’s message is resonating more with the electorate?
I have designed a simple 4 question vox pop to help us develop some level on clarity. Please participate. It should take you 15 seconds and it is 100% anonymous. Kindly also share with your Antiguan and Barbudan friends and colleagues and ask them to complete and to pass on to others as well.
Whatever the outcome I commit to publishing the full results here for all to see once I have 300 respondents.
April 2, 2014 · 5:52 am
Vox pop: Gauging the Guyanese political temperature
Amidst all the rhetoric what are the feelings of the people? That question is often ignored. This is a 5 question vox pop which aims to gauge the political temperature in Guyana from the perspective of the people. It is completely anonymous and should only take 15-20 seconds of your time. Once there are 300 responses the full results will be published for all to see. Please take the survey and encourage others to do so as well.
Filed under Uncategorized
Deolatchmie’s shoes
Yesterday, President Donald Ramotar and First Lady Deolatchmie Ramotar, were captured in what, in all likelihood, will be the most iconic photograph of them as First Couple. They stood alongside global symbols of elegance and class, United States President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama.
For national leaders, the holy grail of posed photographs – the one with prominence of place on the presidential office wall – has been, for decades, being captured with the President of the United States of America. This has been exponentially multiplied since Mr. Obama ascended to the US presidency. It is for this explicit reason, and the mountain of requests, that the White House purposefully designated several hours of the Obamas schedule in New York for photo ops with world leaders attending the UN General Assembly.
There ought to be recognition too, of the fact that this assignment to New York is the most high profile for the our First Lady since taking office.
What was an historic photographic opportunity, and more importantly an incomparable public relations opportunity, not only for the Ramotars, but for Guyana as a whole was squandered and reduced to shame and regret by our First Lady’s choice in footwear. The photograph quickly went viral among Guyanese and the wider Caribbean last evening after being published by NCN.
Having happened upon the photograph, a Jamaican friend messaged me thus: “OMG! Those are iconic skettle shoes. You couldn’t get more skettle than dat! Wow! Shows class cannot be bought.”
There have been numerous posts and comments from various Guyanese who have rebuked those who have expressed shock, derision and even outrage at the embarrassment brought upon Guyana by Mrs. Ramotar’s footwear. Their argument, to capture it succinctly, has been that this is a storm in a teacup and that as Mrs. Ramotar is a good, decent and humble woman she ought not to be harangued for what they see as a minor fashion faux pas.
I submit that those who so contend are either suffering from extreme naivety or have a complete misunderstanding of the critical importance of image portrayal, specifically on the international stage. I particularly worry about politicians and members of government who express this view, as they, more than the average citizen, should possess an acute awareness of these matters.
Perhaps it is an attempt to either ignore the broader framework within which this issue is to be examined or to divert attention away from the magnitude of the ramifications of the blunder.
Guyana is a country which is still fighting a losing battle with an undesirable global image. Our country is still routinely, even in diplomatic circles, mistaken for Ghana. And of those who do recognize Guyana as a South American, and not African nation, the association is still largely of Jim Jones’s 1978 mass massacre. Add that Guyana is consistently mentioned alongside Haiti as the poorest nations in the Western Hemisphere.
Guyana’s international image is a mostly negative one.
Cartagena notwithstanding, this photo op with the Obamas, and the resultant public relations spin offs, was, effectively, the Ramotars photographic introduction on the global stage. It will, for years to come, remain among the most prominent images of them – perhaps the most prominent image. It is how a large number of global citizens will come to see and form images of them, Guyana and Guyanese.
A nation is known to the world, and even thrives, through its most prominent personalities. Think Usain Bolt/Jamaica, Barack Obama/United States, Nelson Mandela/South Africa, Rihanna/Barbados, Brian Lara/Trinidad & Tobago.
A country’s leader and their partner are at the forefront of representing their nation internationally. For millions across the world, it is through photographic and video representations of a country’s leader, that opinions are formed of a country and its people. The nation’s leader is, in the absence of Usain Bolt type figures, the foremost ambassador. His wife, often by his side, is effectively, second-in-command in this regard.
This is not merely about a pair of gaudy shoes – it is about how our nation is presented, on the world stage, through its leader and his wife.
For all the humility we know Mrs. Ramotar possesses, the image she portrayed to the world of herself and by extension Guyana, and more specifically Guyanese women, is one of a classless, inelegant, tacky dullard.
Then there are those who have sought to make light of the shoes debacle, juxtaposing it with the importance of Mr. Ramotar’s speech to the General Assembly. Mr. Ramotar’s speech may be widely broadcast in Guyana but will it make news or even be noticed in international media? Unlikely.
For all the romanticism we may wish to ascribe to the importance of Mr. Ramotar’s speech in the wider global context its airtime will be negligible if even on the radar. The salient point therefore is that the Ramotars/Obamas photograph is and will remain a – perhaps the – highlight, moreso than whatever Mr. Ramotar manages to deliver tomorrow, of the Guyana presence at this UN General Assembly. Of all photos taken of the Guyanese First Couple, it is perhaps the photo which will be most shared and viewed internationally. The photograph is also now an official item in the White House Photographic Gallery (which is partially available here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitehouse).
There is another contention that Mrs Ramotar did not ‘sign up’ for this level of scrutiny so as a result persons should go easy on her. That is either misguided or disingenuous – I believe the former more so than the latter.
Mrs. Ramotar did not, from her position of acute influence, dissuade her husband from pursuing the presidency. She stood side-by-side with him and was prominently featured on the campaign platform. She is complicit and must take responsibility.
The Office of First Lady is a constitutional office of the land. It is funded by taxpayers. Mrs. Ramotar has assumed this office and has executed some commendable initiatives locally. However she is obviously lacking a comprehensive understanding of her role and the consequences of her actions and choices. The fault cannot be laid entirely at her feet. The government as a whole must take greater responsibility. There was dereliction of duty by protocol and/or other responsible officers at the Office of the President, specifically those who are a part of the Guyana delegation in New York. They should have ensured that she is properly and suitably attired. It is part of their function and remit.
The First Lady is no longer a low profile housewife or a private citizen. She is among the foremost ambassadors of this nation and by virtue of her own admission at her excitement to travel with her husband she has committed to representing this nation in the international arena.
How she is presented is of utmost importance to the country. She will be, whether we like it or not, whether we accept it or not, a walking embodiment to those she interacts with and are viewed by, of Guyana, Guyanese and specifically Guyanese women. Opinions will be formed of our still little known nation based on President Ramotar’s and First Lady Deolatchmie’s appearances and representations. It is a fact of life with which we must contend.
It is because of the significance of image that it is standard practice for foreign service officers to receive clothing allowances. It is for similar reasons that image consultancy is a thriving global industry. And ‘dress for success’ is not oft repeated for no good reason.
We should recall too that this is not the first time this has occurred. Former President Bharrat Jagdeo had also come under fire, mainly from Stabroek News, for his poor choice of attire on a diplomatic undertaking in South America. After responding with characteristic anger the then President took action and upgraded his wardrobe. In the latter stages of his presidency, for all his other shortcomings, he could not be accused, especially when on international duty, of presenting himself – by attire – in poor taste.
So to assert that we should simply turn a blind eye to as basic an issue as the appearance of our First Family is to submit to what is colloquially described as a ‘dunkaydam’ (don’t-care-damn) mentality. It is a subscription to this sort fo mediocrity which has enveloped and stagnated Guyana. It is symptomatic of what is wrong with Guyana at its very core.
It is this attitude, mindset and disposition to make excuses for and excuse shortcomings which contribute to how Guyanese are viewed and treated at international ports of entry. It is this attitude, mindset and disposition which allow our embassies and consulates to be humiliations to our people and the nation. As a pertinent example one of our consulates is located in a cluttered, unsightly room between a seamstress’ shop and a low class nail salon.
To ignore or diminish the wider context of Mrs. Ramotar’s shoe choice is to demonstrate a profound misunderstanding of that which is of no insignificant value to a nation losing the fight to establish a positive image of itself on the global stage.
Filed under Guyana, Local Politics, Regional Politics, Women, World Politics
A declaration of premeditated intent
It is inconceivable how, in a civilized and even half-democratic society, a Commissioner of Police can make the comments made by our own Acting Commissioner of Police Mr. Leroy Brummell and retain his job.
But this, as they say, is Guyana.
Commissioner Brummell is reported to have said: “It’s aching that some of these persons are scared. They are just going forward, riling up the people and they who are riling it up are not there. If you are a leader, stand up with the people. They are just going, riling up and they gone. These fellows are just hiding themselves and covering their skin and sending them to blows.”
Commissioner Brummell is no low level law enforcement officer. He is the Chief Executive Officer, as it were, of the Guyana Police Force. He is responsible for its management and the execution of its sacred duties to protect the citizens of this country regardless of whether they are under attack in their homes, walking the streets or peacefully assembled in protest of what they view as unjust.
Commissioner Brummell has, in no ambiguous terms, declared to the nation that protestors will be met with “blows”. It is a bold cold-blooded declaration of the pre-meditated intent of the Guyana Police Force in treating with protestors.
Worse it must be viewed as incriminatory in light of the massacre, by shots through the heart, of three innocent and peaceful protestors in Linden by members of the Guyana Police Force in Linden on July 18th. Lest we forget over twenty other Lindeners were wounded by shots of various kinds about their bodies.
The newspaper have been littered with the stories of the Guyana Police Force acting as judge, jury and executioner while their own accounts of incidents and those of eyewitnesses almost always are at stark variance.
There has been no national outrage or condemnation towards the comments of the Commissioner and the officer himself for making them. It should not matter that the Commissioner’s comments came as a response to a reckless call by WPA executive David Hinds.
The Commissioner’s declaration in and of itself threatens the people that should they think of engaging in their constitutional right to protest they must be aware that they will be met with force, bullets and blows. The police force’s own actions in violating protestors, the administrations indifference towards violence meted out to protestors and the Commissioner’s declaration of premeditated intent to exact ‘blows’, serve to instruct Guyanese that as far as the regime and the law enforcement agency is concerned, protest action is not just to be frown upon but not to be tolerated in any form whatsoever.
What the Commissioner has also alerted the nation to is that there is in fact, as long suspected, a policy (perhaps unwritten) of selective application of the law. And those who protest, as is their supposed right, ought to now know how the law will be applied to them.
How the Commissioner, following his statements can continue to enjoy the confidence of the people of this nation whom it is his sworn duty to serve and protect, I do not know. And wither the constitution and whatever rights are therein enshrined.
Filed under Uncategorized
David Hinds’ Buxton call
I am unequivocal in my condemnation of the Working People’s Alliance/A Partnership for National Unity’s David Hinds’ call for the digging up/ blocking of the East Coast Highway by Buxtonians in support of the Linden Struggle. Given Hinds’ professional engagement I expected a more judicious and discerning reading of the present mood of Guyana. I view Brother Hinds’ call as overventuresome and ill-conceived. This is especially so now that the August 17th Agreement has been initialled and likely to be signed by the two parties.
Privately I had advocated, immediately following the July 18th massacre of Lindeners by police, that the struggle should take the form of Lindeners peacefully slow travelling to Georgetown, and peacefully occupying the Square of the Revolution and outside Office of the President until their demands were met. I concede now, that such action, had it been undertaken, would have diluted the Linden Struggle. What transpired, of Lindeners locating their struggle in Linden, was a more effective course of action which has forced the government to formally yield to their demands as we have seen with the August 17th Agreement.
I can understand, in the face of the executive abuse of Guyana, Hinds’ anxiety to see the removal of the unjust PPP regime and thus the nationalizing of the struggle. I understand too Hinds’ expressed disappointment with the rest of Guyana not taking to the streets in standing in solidarity with Linden. Political action, revolution and change though often come in stages and piecemeal and not always as a flood of overnight transformation. It is part of the process.
If Buxtonians are of the conviction that they, as a community, continue (we know they have been subjected to) to be maligned and discriminated against then they have every right to do as Linden did and protest as they are allowed to constitutionally. Buxtonians have demonstrated that when they reach that stage they will take the actions they deem necessary and they need not academics or scholars to issue calls to them to act.
Further Hinds’ proposal in all likelihood will only allow for regression in the national struggle for change from the PPP regime. The blocking of the East Coast Highway at this time will allow the legendary PPP propaganda machinery to heighten its effectiveness by sending their divisive messages of fear to their base in an effort to galvanize their support based on emotion above reason.
Hinds fails to appreciate too that events of the 2002-2008 crime wave are too fresh in the psyche of the nation and any action by Buxton such as proposed by him stands to quickly alienate the Indo-Guyanese community who demonstrated in no insignificant way on November 28th that they too are in strong disapproval of the regime’s handling of the republic. Gains of unparallelled proportions have been made within the last year especially, opposition political leaders must be astute and shrewd in protecting these and ensuring that these are not squandered.
It will also allow the regime to float the ‘anarchy line’ as cover for the more violent and fatal action by agents of the state which will lead to the death and violation of our brothers and sisters. We know of the regime’s approval of the use of deadly force in response to even peaceful protests.
That Hinds’ call has not gained traction speaks for itself.
What I believe Hinds and other senior leaders of APNU and also the leaders of AFC should be undividedly committed to is the matter of constitutional reform which will allow for a change of government by the ballot box when elections are next called. The PPP is comfortable with the current system which allows that party a minority of the total vote but 100% of the executive power. There must be constitutional reform and there, above all else, is where the combined political energies ought to be focussed.
Filed under Guyana, Justice, Local Politics
‘You People’ letter examined
Demerara Waves’ realTalk examines that ‘You People’ letter from His Excellency President Donald Ramotar to the people of Linden.
“President Ramotar has written an open letter to the residents of Linden in which he openly displays his arrogance towards the residents of Linden. Also on display is his notorious ignorance of the issues affecting Lindeners. The aloof tone that permeates throughout this letter leaves readers in disdain and disbelieve as his Excellency presents his jaundiced views as to why he believes Lindeners are protesting. His inability to properly address the issues affecting Lindeners only reveals further his incompetence as president.”
Filed under Uncategorized
A history of PPP police brutality and violence against the Guyanese citizenry
In July of 2012 following the killing of three peaceful protestors in Linden, police brutality against the citizenry under the People’s Progressive Party government was brought to the frontburner of national attention. It follows an already bulging list of cases of police brutality under the PPP rule since 1992, with one case in particular – the burning of the genitals of a 14 year old boy at the Leonora Police Station being most heinous.
Police brutality and violence against the Guyanese citizenry under the PPP government though is not new. See below an excerpt taken from ‘Cheddi Jagan and the Politics of Power: British Guiana’s Struggle for Independence’ written by Colin A. Palmer and published by the University of North Carolina Press Chapel Hill.
The general similarities of present day Guyana and what we see happening to Linden under the PPP, to the Fairbain case which Palmer extracts from official records are as evil and sickening as they are chilling and worrisome. These similarities speak to a particular modus operandi which was most recently spoken of by AFC Leader Khemraj Ramjattan. What follows should be compulsory reading for every Guyanese. Be warned that it does get graphic at points so if you cannot easily stomach same you may want to properly prepare your mind before proceeding.
Introduction
“I does watchman at Clarke and Merton by night and I does get a small piece.” Thus began the statement that the frightened young man gave to the police in Georgetown on the afternoon of August 9, 1964. Emmanuel Fairbain, alias Batson, had been picked up by members of the Crime Squad allegedly for bombing Freedom House, the headquarters of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), on July 31. Of African descent, Fairbain was thirty-one years old and supported the opposition party, the People’s National Congress (PNC). His arrest and mistreatment in jail and subsequent events revealed the cancer that had been affecting British Guiana’s body politic for the past decade. British Guiana’s politicians and residents took sides in ugly disputes that were as much manifestations of the corrosive effects of colonialism on a society and its people as they were the consequences of mediocre leadership, politically inspired racial animus, and the machinations of outside interests.
Fairbain was alone in his room at the Elizabeth guesthouse when about eight policemen dressed in plain clothes burst in at “about 2 or 3 o’clock in the morning.” As he would later confess to a Court of Inquiry, Fairbain had been up drinking and dancing with friends until about midnight. Thereafter, he partied with a girl in his room, but the night revelry ended on a bitter note as “myself and the girl had a quarrel and I gave her a couple of cuffs because when I was upstairs she took more money than she supposed to have. I gave her $4.00 and I had $7.00 on the table and she take that too.”
Fairbain had just returned from escorting his guest downstairs when the policemen invaded his room. Obviously on a serious mission, they began to search his belongings. One of them, a man he later identified as Clarke, looked under his bed and discovered “a rice bag”. “Oh God, he got um yah,” Clarke announced and asked Fairbain for his gun since the bag contained ammunition. Fairbain denied that he had a gun; then, “All the eight men started beating me all over the body with their fists. I shouted ‘Oh God, don’t beat me.’ They beat me in the guts and head.”
Fairbain reported that the policemen took him in a van to Brickdam, the local jail, and put him in an empty room on the ground floor. “There was no light inside,” he recalled; “they start beating me again and some more come in.” The officers “started kicking me up. They tied my balls with cord and pulled it tight. I then found myself on the ground on the concrete and wet. They had stripped me as I went in. I fainted away when they pulled the cord tight. I started to cry…. They actually raised me off the ground with the cord.” The victim said he recognized Officers Hintzen, Powers, and Lambert. When Fairban declined to cooperate with the officers or “talk upon myself,” Officer Lambert left the room, only to return and proclaim, “Alright he can talk now – he playing harden.” Then according to Fairbain, Lambert “let go a tear gas shell in the room. They all run out and left me in. I begged them to come and give me water. Nobody came. Some time after the same Lambert came back again and asked me if I am ready to give him a statement. I said, ‘Officer me ain’t know nothing.”
Trying a different tactic, Inspector Grimmon sat on a bench beside Fairbain, telling him: “Boy you best you tell me all you got to tell me because me sorry for you. Them will beat you bad in this place.” Reentering the room, Lambert advised Fairbain to “go there to the pipe and wet your balls there.” Fairbain said that “the sink in the room was a bit high for me” and: My balls were swollen up but even on my toes I would only just meet up to the sink and I tried to put water on myself and then a dark skinned Indian chap named Kandasammy kicked me on my side and then Mr. Lambert said “bring him out here.” I was trembling with the pain from my balls. Lambert said “I will make you talk now.”
He then fixed something, told them to hold my hands which they did and I begged him “oh officer, oh officer.” He said “You will get to know me. I’m a very quiet chap but I’m very hard,” and then he discharged a tea gar on my balls. I fall down but they pull me back up and propped me up because I can’t stand up. Then they clap me on both ears the same time then when I catch my breath I start to holler.
The abuse continued. When Officer Lambert believed the torture had the desired effect, he asked the detainee, “Are you ready to tell me what you have to tell me now?” The interrogator listed a number of bombings that had occurred in Georgetown, accusing Fairbain of knowing about them. “Me ain’t know nothing about them thing da,” he responded. “You ain’t talk, you going dead here today,” Lambert threatened.“When I done with you, you ain’t good for yourself,” he warned. Eventually Fairbain broke under the physical abuse and interrogation, assuring the officers, “If you all write anything I’m going to sign it.” As he gave his statement, “the Indian Inspector was doing the writing and he write quick and again I was saying what to put down.” Fairbain signed the statement but “I was in too much pain to read it.” Thereafter, the physical abuse ceased but the interrogation continued. Four days later, Fairbain was hospitalized for his injuries.
The Fairbain case became a cause célèbre, capturing the attention of the public, the governor, the premier and his Council of Ministers, the secretary of state for the colonies, and the American consul general. It laid bare the serious disabilities of the law enforcement system, the central role that violence was playing in the polity, and the crippling burden of the racial politics that had come to define the society. I short, Fairbain became the metaphorical representation of a bleeding Guiana.
Filed under Uncategorized
Linden shooting 2
Randy Tello of Linden was shot, he alleges, by police on the evening of Tuesday, August 14th 2012.
August 16, 2012 · 5:41 am
mediaimran.wordpress.com 
