Does Dr. Norton deserve a second chance?

 

Dear Editor

EVERY minister should realise that moral responsibility is a correlation of the oath of office. This is especially important as the country deals with the question of the “Norton Fiasco” concerning the “bond deal”.In no uncertain terms, Dr. Norton, losing his moral compass, betrayed himself, his sense of right and wrong, his office, our president, our nation, and the Guyanese people. Many have clamoured for his censure, but one should also ask whether Norton’s humiliation is apt punishment for his transgression.

Does Norton need a second chance? If he is remorseful because he is trying to escape censure, then he should be censured. If he is remorseful because he truly acknowledges the truth of his inappropriate misstep, then he has the potential to be one of the most loyal and dedicated servants of our country. I cannot pass judgment on Dr. Norton; only he knows his heart. He has to decide on his own to whom he needs to confess, and whether he can honour his oath to serve Guyana honestly and faithfully.

And as we focus on Dr. Norton, we should not forget the photograph of Mr. Harmon cruising above the clouds in a private jet. It might be prudent for all ministers to have that photograph in their sights, physically or mentally. Let them look and analyze the positioning and smiles of the people who were in control in that setting. That photograph has much to tell: sunglasses in a climate-controlled jet, a faceless and nameless woman at one’s shoulder.

Yes, I am calling attention to what Norton and Harmon have done, and what they could have become if their actions had not been revealed. If each has the wisdom to recognise the gravity of his actions and each has the strength to refrain from a recurrence of those actions, then each would have been reformed. If the foregoing is missing, what will these men become?

We can look, as an example, at the former President, Bharrat Jagdeo, who was once full of commendable potential. President Jagdeo was my hero when he signed the agreement with Norway to protect Guyana’s forest, but somewhere along the line, he was accused of becoming a different being. I do not know the truth in those accusations, but I have read that because his marriage was not registered, his wife was not entitled to a pension. Thus the witnesses to his marriage, the photographs of his wedding, he living with his wife, his wife being presented as the First Lady of Guyana did not mean anything to him.

Women symbolise our country; if we mistreat our women we mistreat our country. If we honour our women we honour our country. Any minister of Government who yields to self-serving temptation should realise that they are embracing their conceit and it would lead them to a place of no return.

I can continue, but let me end with this admonition: We do not need race-oriented opposition parties in Guyana; we need inclusive political parties that recognise and acknowledge the different philosophy of each other’s political party; and strive together for equity, justice and prosperity for all Guyanese. These parties should ensure that neither political party nor any of its members transgress the boundaries of office.
Regards,
STANLEY NIAMATALI

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp
All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.