FROM the outset, it must be mentioned that the views expressed herein, though implicitly supported, are those conceptualised and penned by this writer. They are not expressly those of any other student, or of the second-year law class as a whole. This response is in relation to a mostly fallacious article published in the Guyana Chronicle on Sunday, March 11th, captioned ‘Law students being exploited at UG’.
As a matter of clarification, it is the firm conviction of this writer, that the author of the aforementioned letter may not be who he/she represented himself/herself to be. It is believed that the author scripted the letter in such a manner so as to mislead and manipulate the public into believing the lack of veracity he/she posited.
With respect to the venomous attack on the planning committee, it is inconceivable that the writer could honestly question the integrity of a committee that slavishly continues to work for the enrichment of the entire class, inclusive of the child to whom the letter refers.
The committee was established to garner monies so as to offset the expenses that would be incurred for holding a welcoming social for incoming first-year law students, as well as a law gala; an event where the aspiring lawyers are introduced to the legal fraternity.
Contrary to the allusion of the obligatory nature of payments towards the desired sum for these events, it must be made abundantly clear that such payments were requested as a matter of contribution only. Therefore, all students were, and still are in a position to indicate their ability, or lack thereof, to make such contributions. As it relates to the prices mentioned in the letter, these are not of modern unilateral vintage by the committee, but are those used based on empirical validity, after consulting past records on the said events. It should be appreciated by those who claim to be concerned that the prices remain the same after all these years, even though the cost of acquisition of the requisite products does not.
University students, and the name suggests just as much, attend a tertiary institution. There is no room for callowness, and parents should give their children every opportunity to mature. The request to have a parent/teacher meeting with the head of the department in relation to this issue seems like the over-reaction of an overly protective parent. It begs the question whether the parent will request parent/judge meetings when the child begins practising this noble profession which is rife with imminent challenges.
Under the circumstances, it is expected that if one possesses a desire to bring such matters to the fore, especially with regard to issues of which they are effectively ignorant, there should be strenuous efforts to verify the veracity thereof.
In the absence of such verification, their submissions could be tainted with inaccuracies and innuendoes as is the case with the subject letter. A truly concerned parent, knowing what this purported parent knew, could have easily approached a member of the committee for necessary clarifications, which I am sure would have been furnished without hesitation.
At the end of the day, the committee has nothing to hide. Coincidentally, every interested member of the class is aware of the status of the monies raised so far because the committee keeps the class informed in this regard.
In conclusion, it would have been prudent of the author of the letter to seek prior edification relative to the accuracy of matters emanating from the committee and with the rules and practices of the university.
It is obviously the lack of proven facts that has led this person to conceal his/her identity. For someone claiming to be devoid of financial resources, that is potentially devastating. It is finally most fitting to end with the words of the erudite Dr Martin Luther King Jr. “Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity”.