Dear Editor,
THESE days, the appeal I made some time ago, and the position taken by the likes of Dr. David Hinds is that the time is ripe for some of our leaders to stop beating the war drums and saber-rattling but rather sit down and talk to find a modus vivendi to save our beloved Guyana.

The idea for a review of our Constitution should be predicated that in our volatile political environment, the outcome could be some form of a national-front government with elements of strict rules, morality and, above all, sanctions against anyone who violates agreed rules and conditions, etc.

This, of course, requires that all of our leaders, young and old, set aside pettiness, folly and personal interest. But, Mr. Editor, when I hear statements from some of our leaders, I wonder if they are capable of making this quantum leap of change for a good Guyana.
A few days ago, I read with consternation an argument advanced by no less a person than a former Attorney- General, Anil Nandlall. He asserts that acquisition and presentation of death certificates by the APNU/AFC group taking part in the recount process is illegal.

Some members of the legal profession have disagreed with this learned gentleman and former Attorney-General under the PPP administration. My approach is outside and beyond any legal niceties. Those involved in the recount, which is an effort to find the truth of the March 2, 2020 General and Regional electoral process ought not to be frustrated by the threats of a legal recourse, obviously intended to hide the truth.

Politicians everywhere must seek information to support their cause and satisfy their concerns; they must be able to produce evidence to the appropriate authority, in this case, GECOM. How else can any authority find a solution and come to a conclusion, if they are not allowed to receive all relevant evidence.

I would assume that anyone such as Mr. Nandlall would be anxious to have all relevant information available to GECOM and even the public. Even if he is correct about the illegality of obtaining death certificates, he will be inconsistent in his talk about “Free and Fair Elections.” We must be surprised when the Opposition seems so anxious to sweep important information under the carpet, we must ask why?

Perhaps, he would like to lead us to the quip, credited to Mr. Bumble in Charles Dickens’ novel, Oliver Twist, when Mr. Bumble declared, “The Law is an Ass.” We have already in Guyana seen how this statement is relevant. Let us await the results of GECOM’s recount; let us do nothing to impede its progress. Mr. Nandlall obviously feels the way Mr. Bumble felt. In this case, in his own and parties’ narrow interest.
Let us ensure that the ‘Law is not made to be an Ass.’

Regards,
Hamilton Green