GIVEN what had been the nature of a government that governed this nation for in excess of two decades, which governance with its defined criminal nature had evidenced a deliberate pillage of state resources, which can only fit the just and specific label of high-voltage corruption; and which became institutionalised, because of the new understanding of morality which, among its many meanings and interpretations, held no one accountable for grand theft and self-enrichment.

This was no overnight arrived-at scenario that had been trumped up merely for the sake of political mileage, or baseless accusations intended to besmirch persons/characters. In fact, red flags were ever since raised in prior state audits, which pointed to deliberate departures from procedures of accountability, which were questioned in observation reports. Moreover, many sections of the then media had already begun to expose flagrant acts of corrupt practices, much to the anger of the then regime that did absolutely nothing to investigate such reports, much less with a view of prosecuting those guilty.

It must be re-emphasised that if there is any act of bad governance that angers citizens, it is that which involves theft of state resources by officials, irrespective of their status. Stated simply, this is a crime committed against the people, and, therefore, there is every reason for such an intolerance for this very serious violation, the cancer of corruption. Corruption is about crimes in all forms against the state, since it is taxpayer’ hard-earned dollars and other related assets that are being siphoned off for self- enrichment.

Confirmed by extensive auditing of state enterprises, it was evident that this was no minor act of fiddling with the books or basic theft; its immoral practices which had virtually strangled the state, thus threatening its moral existence, had already become known; it was a major feature of the then political opposition, A Partnership for National Unity+ Alliance For Change, during its 2015 national elections campaign.

Therefore, it was only reasonable that there would have been legitimate expectations that those responsible for the plunder of the state’s resources, be made to answer for their venality; except that the prosecutorial results have not yielded the convictions expected — giving rise to less than honest criticisms from the PPP/C whose many former regime officials have been charged– that the charges were of a political nature, vindictive, spurious and therefore without substance.

It is against this background that the recent announcement by Minister of Public Security, Khemraj Ramjattan, about “a shake-up of the prosecutorial service…’’ has been made, describing it as very “embarrassing’’ and “stressful’’ that the state has lost “high-profile’’ prosecutions which it should have won. Of course, Minister Ramjattan speaks for and on behalf of the coalition administration; his sentiments, apart from resonating with the law-abiding citizenry, express the great concern of the Executive.

It was astonishing to say the least, but more so shocking, for comments declaring that charges “were bad in law,” in the first such case that came to court in this category so described by the minister. If this had been amazing, then it became incredulous when prosecutors in matters of a similar nature failed to be present in court for such cases.

No responsible government, especially one that has done so much in combatting the cancer that is corruption that became institutionalised in Guyana and which was inherited; and for which it has received many noted commendations, must countenance such an untenable state of affairs with regard to persons who should have been convicted for very grave offences committed against the state and people, being made to escape the iron anvil of deserved justice, because of questionable prosecutorial behaviour. For such can only result in the wrong message being received by society that accused persons can commit crimes and not be sanctioned, because of their status. Or, that raping the state of its resources in whatever form, carries no penalty, since it is a means to an end.

Certainly, we hasten to add that this is not the understanding/moral stance of the President David Granger administration, that has been insisting on clean and accountable government.

We fully support the minister’s call for prosecutors to be more responsible; and even if, as strongly indicated, that he has to “shake up the prosecutorial system’’ to find those who are “more responsible,’’ so it must be.

They must all be reminded that it is incumbent upon them to represent the best interests of the State; no nation that has suffered the venal experience of the degutting of its State, and the pillaging of its material resources for self -enrichment, as Guyana has, must allow those guilty to go free.