The ERC must remain steadfast and vigilant
IN life, having disagreements on issues is a universally acceptable norm. After all, what would life be if diverse opinions were to be absent? There was a time when the articulation of diverse opinions was not tolerated. This dominated the reign of dictators whose proclivity was to stifle any semblance of an opposing point of view.

Guyana was not spared the wrath of a dictator from 1964 to 1992. The advent of democracy in 1992 delivered a nation held in dictatorial bondage for almost three decades. The PPP/C administration has since protected and nurtured Guyana’s democracy.

Today, a multiplicity of diverse opinions inundates the plethora of media entities that have been established within the last two decades across the country. People from across the  economic, social, political and religious spectrums, to note a few, openly engage in this tenet of democracy.

While many of these opinions are considered vile and sometimes inciting, they are ventilated freely and uninhibited. This, and other democratic practices here, have been recognised and lauded by other countries and international agencies. Democracy in Guyana is exemplary.

While this trend continues to be fostered, a few here have resorted to abusing this privilege  which they were once denied and use it for their own convenience.

A simple perusal of independent newspapers and the content of some privately owned television stations will reveal the recurrent despicable misinformation that is being peddled unabated.

Many have condemned such unprofessional and unethical utterances only to be bombarded with the convenient excuse of operating under the freedom of expression.

The few in question have used this in an effort to justify their blatant transgression of journalistic ethics for their constant vilification of government and character defamation of officials.

Such convenient usage of this recurring excuse is pellucid in the accusations made by a columnist of  one of the local independent newspapers. This newspaper has, through its skewed content, demonstrated its support and allegiance to the Opposition.

While everyone is free to have his/her own political persuasion regardless of profession, this said newspaper is swift to pounce and accuse others who differ from their views, of exhibiting unprofessional tendencies.

This particular newspaper and its columnist in question are never hesitant to chastise and slander those who share and support the views of the government. Some, who became victims, have even sought protection and redress of the Court from such unprovoked onslaught.

It is clear that the newspaper and its cohorts feel that they alone have the freedom and the right to exercise freedom of expression. By this action, it would therefore be unchallenging to conclude that the newspaper and its affiliates use this democratic right for their own convenience.

This is further demonstrated in the exchanges between the columnist referred to and the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC). The columnist constantly peddles the notion that the existence of the constitutional body, the ERC, is illegal.

This misleading concept is not only farfetched, but is riddled with inaccuracies. These journalistic indiscretions have become the hallmark of this media entity, thereby losing any semblance of credibility it may have possessed in the past.

Surely, the publisher and editorial staff cannot claim to be oblivious of these journalistic contraventions which have become embodied as part of the newspaper’s modus operandi. They are cognisant of what is acceptable journalistic ethics.

In this regard, again it is not challenging to conclude that the newspaper’s proclivity to contravene the basic tenets of journalism must be for convenience for a particular outcome.

The ERC has been empowered through Parliament to take action, through mediation or the Courts, against anyone or entity which seeks to promote racial or ethnic violence or hatred.

The ERC can and will monitor the pronouncements of all politicians and media operatives in an effort to ensure that harmony continues to prevail. The consequences of being convicted of such irresponsible acts are not confined to a fine or imprisonment, but in addition to being prevented from holding related offices.

In the case of a media operative/publisher who is convicted of such crimes, he/she will be disqualified from being appointed  an editor or to the editorial staff or to managerial positions in any newspaper or broadcasting station.

For politicians and aspiring ones, convictions will result in disqualification from being a member of the National Assembly and from any office in a political party, whether paid or unpaid.

These are necessary measures to curb the proliferation of abuse perpetrated by some including the newspaper and its columnist which are the main subjects of this editorial.

It would be foolish to assume that they are ignorant of what is spelt out in the Racial Hostility Act Chapter 23:01. If the ERC were to act, then some, given their utterances, will be made to face the related punitive measures.

In a concerted effort to prevent the ERC from executing its duties, the newspaper and its cronies have resorted to a campaign to discredit the legality of the ERC, its Chairman and its Commissioners.

They envisage that if their efforts are fruitful, then they can operate with impunity to denigrate the administration and those who share its views. It’s ironic how the convenience of the excuse of freedom of expression can be used.

Guyana’s democracy is strong and stable. The irresponsible actions of these few, while dangerous, will not succeed in unravelling the peace and harmony that the diverse Guyanese people have come to enjoy.

The ERC must be steadfast in its mandate to prevent the diversionists from disrupting the society and must be commended and supported.