Dear Editor,
I WATCHED with disgust, an interview aired live with Canada’s High Commissioner to Guyana and the former President of The Guyana Press Association.

When asked to clarify her infamous “Frivolous Statements,” the diplomat (no longer honourable in my opinion) maintained that she believes that no one ought to have challenged CARICOM’s agreement which would have usurped GECOM’s role in a “supervisory capacity,” which our Constitution does not allow.

Editor, based on the facts presented by the moderator to the Canadian diplomat during the interview, it is clear that she has no regard for the rights of Guyanese, our Constitution and our Supreme Court’s ruling. We call on the Prime Minister of Canada to recall this unprofessional diplomat with immediate effect.

The facts are that the Appellate Court of Guyana ruled that the agreement made to have CARICOM supervise a recount was unconstitutional, as it would seek to usurp GECOM’s constitutional authority, which is to have General Direction & Supervision of the electoral process at all times.

It must be noted that were it not for that legal challenge brought up by a private citizen Ms. Ulita Moore, the Appeal Court would not have been able to rule that CARICOM cannot supervise Guyana’s elections.

Given all these facts presented to the Canadian diplomat, when asked if she would still say that the legal challenge was frivolous, she maintained that she thinks they were frivolous. This must be rejected by all patriotic citizens of Guyana as it means the Canadian diplomat does not think Guyanese citizens have rights to approach the courts, even when the courts ruled in their favour.

Interestingly, this same Canadian diplomat has not rejected or referred to the legal challenges brought by the PPP’s Holladar as frivolous. The diplomat went on to say that she thought since the President and the leader of the opposition agreed to it, it ought to have some weight and not be challenged. This I find to be a frivolous statement, since no one is above the law, regardless of his/her position as a government leader.

We demand an apology on the basis that the courts did not dismiss the legal challenge as frivolous, instead, they upheld that the CARICOM- supervised agreement was unconstitutional and they ruled that it doesn’t matter who made the agreement, it would have been a breach of our laws. To still say this is frivolous is beyond unacceptable and very undiplomatic.
Regards
Concerned Citizen