Dear Editor,
I REFER to an editorial in another newspaper captioned ‘IMPORTANCE OF PRESS CONFERENCES,’ (KN, July 15), and The Freddie Kissoon column in that paper captioned, ‘Granger and Nagamootoo lack self-confidence,’ (KN, July 17).

I congratulate and thank Kaieteur News for publishing articles which many persons may construe to be critical of the actions and/or person of the Head of State, without fear of reprisal. In the not-too-distant past, many an editor may have hesitated to allow such to be printed, for fear of a lawsuit or boycott or some other more personal act of retaliation. Isn’t movement towards democracy a beautiful thing? Isn’t the fact of a free press a breath of fresh air?

The freedom to express opinions is a basic tenet of democracy. And the acceptance and consideration of constructive criticism by an elected representative of the people is the hallmark of an open, receptive, and responsive mind.

The editorial states that [in response to a question from a journalist], “To his credit, President Granger explained that he has been travelling a lot and so often is hard pressed to plan press conferences.” His Excellency, therefore, listened, considered, and responded. On that occasion, President Granger also said, “My heart is in the right place.”
Let me state that I believe the concern expressed in the editorial and The Freddie Kissoon Column is not without merit. I say this because I can put myself in the shoes of a journalist; journalists want more access to the President.

Editor, there are times when persons have said things which – on the face of it – I find offensive. At such times, I try to put myself in the shoes of the person making the criticism. On many occasions, I conclude that the criticism has merit, was well intended, and therefore, was constructive. Discerning the intent of the person is key.

Editor, I do not presume to speak for the President, but I do have an opinion of his character based on my interpretation of many of his writings, having listened to many of his public utterances, and analysis of his demeanour and statements during face-to- face interaction. I believe that he is a sincere and honest man of integrity; he is committed to democratic principles and, pertinently, decentralisation, devolution, and delegation of authority, decision-making power, and responsibilities. To hoard the spotlight is not within his character.

If one were to put oneself in the shoes of such a man, it would be easy to understand his actions. In his mind, I believe, he knows that there are systems in place to disseminate information and facilitate interactions between the free press and the administration while he devotes his efforts to fixing the mess that he inherited from the previous regime. The President mentioned the emerging oil sector, domestic security, and foreign relations. Having said that, I iterate, that the President having noted the concern expressed by the press, has responded.

With regard to Freddie’s analysis, the conclusion of which is expressed in the caption of the column, it is incorrect. While space does not permit a thorough deconstruction, I say that no person on earth has ever attained the office of Head of State or Head of Government in the absence of self-confidence.

Finally, interestingly, Leader of the Opposition Mr Bharrat Jagdeo jumped into the fray at his last press conference. Considering his words, and putting oneself in his shoes, one doubts that his intent was to constructively criticise. Incidentally, he can afford daily press conferences, if he wants, at which he can oppose for the sake of opposing, because he has nothing else to do.

Mr Jagdeo said that President Granger is racking up travel-miles, mismanaging the sugar sector, and presiding over a failed domestic security apparatus. May I remind Mr Jagdeo that President Granger did not build an expensive, malfunctioning white elephant at Skeldon; the President has never been accused of colluding with drug lords nor the creation of killing squads; and he has never been known to travel abroad to meet with operators of educational institutions, many of them having dubious reputations, in order to give away Guyana’s patrimony – including land – in exchange for worthless honorary doctorates.

Regards
Mark DaCosta