ONE of the issues that bedeviled philosophy since Socrates began to walk about the streets of Athens teaching philosophy to those who would listen is what moral judgement can you put to some action that defies explanation.
Philosophers do not debate the moral content of known human aggression, like murder, theft, criminal offences. Those are banalities that do not occupy philosophical debate.
Philosophy is more concerned with complex behaviour in society and how you arrive at moral judgement. Some of the great philosophical minds the past hundreds of years have turned their minds to the subject but among them there was no consensus.
Why a particular behaviour is morally objectionable and another is not? What moral criterion are you using? If a man uses vile words, like “fat” to describe his opponents is he morally wrong to do that, and which moral wrong is more despicable when another person says despite evidence shown that he supports a known racist politician?

The incident that will be described below is not easy to put a definitive conclusion on. But I have done that and I know others will disagree. I would like to hear what others say. Here now is an account of the incident. Trevor Williams, last Monday evening, on the Freddie Kissoon Show, described an attitudinal display towards him by Cathy Hughes from the AFC.

Williams said that then Minister of Health, Volda Lawrence asked him to supply a machine to level a playfield in her neighbourhood. Williams, at the time, was in charge of the Athletic Centre at Leonora and the D’Urban Park structure.
After the work was done, Williams wanted to tell the minister that it was done. He asked Cathy Hughes for Minister Lawrence’s cell phone but Hughes said that she cannot give out the number of a minister.
Now before one can decide on the right or wrong in Mrs. Hughes’ attitude, context becomes extremely important and indispensable. Mr. Williams was at the time a foundation member of the AFC who sat alongside Mrs. Hughes in the executive committee and management committee of the AFC for over ten years.

He sat in Parliament with Mrs. Hughes for five years. At the time he made his request to Mrs. Hughes, he was a state official holding his position by virtue of the AFC being part of the government.
Here is my question to readers and since I pose the question I need to give my interpretation. Should Mrs. Hughes’ choice be respected or was she wrong to show that attitude to Williams? Based on how I see life and my understanding of the obligations of humans to each other, Mrs. Hughes should have given him the number. Here now are my arguments.

First, – he was asking for the number based on a favour he did for the minister. That alone should have engendered respect for him. Secondly, Mrs. Hughes and Williams shared a camaraderie that amounted to more than 10 years and thus, he was more than a stranger who could be trusted. You do not give the cell number of an important person to someone you don’t know. The key here is who is making the request.
Mr. Williams was no low-life, street man, he was Mrs. Hughes’ friend and a top policy-maker in the AFC and held an important state job. It is the type of person who is making the request that should be the only consideration.
I have asked for the cellphone numbers of ministers from other ministers and I got it. I received it because the people who gave me it trust me and also believe I would use it for positive purposes.
Thirdly, Mrs. Hughes had an obligation to facilitate her AFC executive in his performance as a state functionary.

Having outlined my arguments for disagreeing, I now come to the reason for Mrs. Hughes’ attitude. I have shown three lawyers this section of my column here for clearance and they have definitely concluded that a person cannot sue for libel if you identify the class to which they belong.

How can you denigrate a person’s character by saying they are middle class. This columnist is a middle class Guyanese. So is my wife. Timothy Jonas looked me in the eyes and said that I criticise middle class people and I am middle class myself. I believe class thinking was the reason for Mrs. Hughes’s approach to Williams.
Former AFC executive, and Chronicle columnist, Leonard Craig, told me that after he saw the show and heard what Williams said, he remembered that he asked Raphael Trotman for Amna Ally’s cell number but he did not give it. I honestly believe Mrs. Hughes should not be in politics.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.