BLUFFING'
POLITICS IN DEATH SQUAD PROBE
By Rickey
Singh
AS
GUYANESE prepare to celebrate the 38th anniversary of Guyana's
independence on Wednesday, the big question is no longer whether there
will be an official probe into allegations of involvement by Minister of
Home Affairs, Ronald Gajraj, in the killings of criminal elements by a
phantom death squad.
Rather,
whether the time has eventually arrived for calling the bluff of
Opposition Leader Robert Corbin's People's National Congress/Reform that
it has credible evidence linking the Home Affairs Minister to such a
squad.
Let
none be so politically obtuse - whatever his or her ethnicity or
political affiliation - that if it is really in possession of
incriminating evidence, the PNC/R would want to miss a good opportunity
to expose Minister Gajraj and, by extension, create serious problems for
the government.
If,
therefore, it is not bluffing, the PNC/R must deliver on its allegations
instead of rushing off letters to the United Nations and refusing to
cooperate with police investigations.
Any
Presidential Commission of Inquiry, established under the Commission of
Inquiry Act, that takes its work seriously, and is concerned with
natural justice and not personalities and party politics, should be able
to summon any individual, association or organisation to give evidence
they feel could help the purpose for which the probe was mandated.
In
this context, I think there are readers, across the political spectrum,
who would have been quite surprised by the statement attributed to
Justice Ian Chang, as reported in another section of the local media,
questioning the usefulness of the Commission if "it doesn't address
the concerns by the opposition".
"Concerns
of the opposition", or bringing closure by findings based on work
of competence and integrity, to the sensational allegations of
ministerial involvement in death squad murders that have cast serious
doubts on the integrity of the governing process?
Chang,
who headed the Disciplined Forces Commission (DFC) with the consent of
the PNC/R, would, like others identified for the three-member
Presidential Commission, cannot be unmindful that at the core of the
raging controversy is the opposition's allegations of Minister Gajraj's
relationship with the claimed phantom death squad.
One
does not have to be a judge or a lawyer, a high-ranking officer of the
Guyana Defence Force or Police Force to appreciate that there is nothing
in the announced terms of reference of the Commission of Inquiry to
prevent the commissioners from pursuing with vigour, competence and
integrity, such investigative procedures that could enable the
unearthing of credible evidence of Minister Gajraj's alleged involvement
with death squad killings. Or, that he has indeed been, as he insists,
the victim of a horrible politically-instigated campaign of slander to
ruin him personally and politically.
It
has been noted that the Commission's terms of reference and even its
composition are not to the liking of the PNC/R. But what else is new for
a party that has made a fine art of opposition for the sake of
opposition?
Dictating
Governance?
After
being in power for 28 years, during which its corroding influence
affected every important institution of this country - including the
judiciary and the disciplined forces, it now behaves as if it has the
right to dictate governance from Congress Place.
I
went on record months ago, on January 18, 2004, in support of Mr. Gajraj
offering his resignation to President Bharrat Jagdeo while an
independent probe is established to deal with the death squad
allegations.
Subsequently,
on February 1, I also urged in this column, that the Home Affairs
Minister should proceed on leave from office and allow "a
transparent probe" to take shape
Finally,
on May 7, Minister Gajraj disclosed in a lengthy statement that he had
asked, some weeks earlier, for President Bharrat Jagdeo to establish an
independent inquiry.
As
he was anxious to clear his name from the criminal allegations against
him, he said, he stood ready to proceed on leave for the inquiry to
begin.
Having
lost the propaganda advantage to the PNC/R and its faithful allies,
through its own vacillations and insistence on investigation by the
Police Force, it was better late than never to learn of the government's
decision to have a three-member Presidential Commission of Inquiry.
Should
such an inquiry find Gajraj culpable of any criminal wrongdoing, then he
would have to face the consequences in a court of law, not the law of
the streets or the spit press.
But
the PNC/R seems to prefer the path of allegations rather than
cooperation with submission of evidence. Consequently, having failed to
produce evidence over the past four months, he has no intention to
cooperate with the Presidential Commission of Inquiry.
The
PNC/R and its allies - either within a fractured Trades Union Congress
were quick to rush to judgement in dismissing as "a farce" the
proposed three-member Presidential Commission of Justice Chang, ex-GDF
head Norman McLean and chairman of the Police Service Commission, Ivan
Crandon, as well as the terms of reference that requires the
Commissioners to:
\Terms
of Reference
"Examine,
advise and report on whether and to what extent there is evidence of a
credible nature to support allegations that the Minister of Home Affairs
has been involved in promoting, directing or otherwise engaging in
activities which have involved the extra-judicial killing of
persons..."
The
PNC/R and its allies claim that the terms of reference are restricted to
the alleged culpability of the Home Affairs Minister and do not include
wider issues of the criminal carnage in which Guyana was gripped in 2002
following the infamous jail-break of five dangerous prisoners.
The
opposition even unfairly cast doubts on the integrity of the three named
commissioners - the composition of which may yet change, for different
reasons, by the time you read this.
If
and when this happens, this aspect of the highly politicised allegations
of ministerial involvement with a "death squad" would require
revisiting.
Particularly,
since the phantom squad controversy has emerged as a major plank in the
protest politics of a party that has been living with a tarnished
history of political assassinations with victims such as that icon of
Guyana and the Caribbean, Walter Rodney, and made celebrities of known
dangerous criminals killed by the police.
Amid
all the negative, rapid-fire responses in rejecting the proposed
Presidential Commission of Inquiry, what has stood out among the
positive approaches - such as that of the Guyana Council of Churches,
and even the qualified support given by the head of the Guyana Bar
Association - is the position articulated by the Guyana Human Rights
Association (GHRA).
In
commenting on why it is wrong to rush to judgement against the
Commissioners and the work of the Commission, the GHRA stated the
preference for wider terms of reference that would have included the
phantom killings from February 2002. But it also pointed to the positive
dimensions that could result from the Presidential Commission.
A
central contention of the GHRA, not expressed by politicians and groups
reacting to the Presidential Commission, is that if indeed there exists
"evidence" about the integrity of the named Commissioners,
then such information should be made known "publicly and
explicitly".
Equally,
I think, all individuals, parties and groups claiming to have
"evidence" of death squad killings and of Minister Gajraj's
involvement, have a moral obligation to make such evidence known.
They
should cease hiding behind media allegations and party platform
accusations for, at the end of the day, they may further reinforce the
perception of the "politics of bluffing" and not helping the
cause of justice.
There
also seems merit in the GHRA's argument in relation to Mr. Crandon's
membership of the Presidential Commission, to avoid any misunderstanding
about conflict of interest, while not questioning either his competence
or integrity.
