Dear Editor
I REFER to Leader of the Opposition Bharrat Jagdeo’s statement that the coalition government will target those members of his party who are possible presidential hopefuls, once that intention becomes known.

Editor, it is that same, now worn-out refrain about the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) members being witch-hunted. This is a continuation of the dishonest narrative, artfully articulated by this party, but designed to incite ethnic tensions among his party’s supporters. It is very unfortunate, that Jagdeo continues with such egregious statements, especially against the background of the incontrovertible audit evidence which supports the charges brought against those personalities of his party who are already before the courts.
It is further proof of the PPP/C’s criminal understanding of what constitutes good governance, with its mandatory rule of accountability for its actions/policies. But this is essentially mirroring the moral crises that face this party’s leader. Jagdeo must be reminded, that the law is applicable to anyone and everyone, irrespective of that person’s political status, especially; whether in a former or current capacity of state, current party office, or possible elevation as a contender for national office, such as a presidential candidacy. Simply put, once there is good reason, supported by investigative enquiries that such a person(s) have been involved in acts of malfeasance against the state – measures must be taken, in similar manner as those against any other citizen. The laws, properly constituted, were never made to exclude from its impartial focus, persons from a specific ethnic/race group, or political party affiliation, as Jagdeo and others of his party seem to have been suggesting.

Just how can a former national leader continue with such contempt and disrespect for the law, as a means of defending his former government against the established mountain pile of solid evidence of state theft, as well as a measure of keeping the hopes of his support base alive, is beyond the realm of personal morality. As leader of the opposition, he must be aware that similar actions are being taken in other jurisdictions against persons, whether still in their former official capacities or not, for crimes committed against the laws of their respective countries. Thus, just why should Guyana be an exception to such a rule, of bringing to justice those accused of similar offences against the state?
Such an understanding of the law could only have originated from Jagdeo’s continuous disrespect and contempt for the laws of Guyana.

Regards
Earl Hamilton