Dear Editor,
FIRST, let me state categorically that I am not an expert or even distantly acquainted with security issues, but have a bit of common sense (I think) and in any case, the government has its share of security “advisors”.
With that being said, I go on to possibly invoke the wrath of many, on “both sides of the corridor” by suggesting that the security forces should have anticipated, even if only from previous experiences, that those intent on using every opportunity to cause disruption of civil order, would have been out in their full battle dress and preparedness on Monday.
I find it extremely difficult to understand why the police would set up cordons to prevent vehicles traversing the block of road where GECOM is situated in Kingston, when not more than five or six hapless people stand with placards from time to time, and failed to cordon off the areas surrounding the hospital where the post mortem was scheduled to be conducted.
Why were protestors permitted to sit on the fence and gate of the Georgetown Hospital?

Why were protestors allowed to penetrate the precincts of the hospital itself?
Why were protestors allowed to move freely from location to location in their reign of terror, burning roads, looting and doing damage to vehicles and traumatising peaceful citizens?
Even the doctor who, I understand was looking after the interest of the family of the deceased, publicly and emotionally declared that he never saw doctors so scared/terrified as those who were performing the autopsy.

I find it difficult to understand why the army was not mobilised earlier when it was obvious from the plethora of evidence that “mischief was afoot”.
I’m suggesting our security forces must be prepared, thorough intelligence gathering, to prevent a repeat of the type of lawlessness that was displayed on Monday April 28.
I have a feeling (supported by many others) that in this election year, other such “centrally directed” and orchestrated campaigns are going to be attempted, and that this one was a rehearsal to test the terrain and the reaction of the security forces.
As I’m writing this today (Wednesday April 30) there’s a press event by opposition parties and individuals calling for protection of the protestors, among other unfortunate demands and remarks.

I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. They were asking for protection of hooliganism and terrorism by persons with long knives and other similar implements, obviously only intended to do harm to innocent people.
Videos appeared live of the homeless being beaten on the streets. How can self-proclaimed fair and intelligent individuals call for the protection of persons roaming the streets, burning, looting and causing havoc and destruction to government and private property?
Were these opposition elements aware of the magnitude of the destruction caused, infrastructure damaged, businesses looted, children and adults assaulted with acid thrown on them, schools disrupted, and a peace loving society traumatised?

Let me be pellucid that peaceful protests/demonstrations, large or small, are acceptable in almost all jurisdictions, including Guyana. Case in point, the demonstrations against the Commissioner of Information, but when these are converted, intentionally or otherwise, into disorder, with clear intentions to disrupt the civil order, the security forces have no alternative than to put an end to it effectively and professionally.
I know I’ve diverted from my original intention, but I think it was necessary to point out the hypocrisy and fear engendering extent and tactics some are prepared to espouse for cheap political purposes.
I’m hoping that those who have the responsibility to protect all the citizens of Guyana do so in a responsible, fearless, intelligent and most of all, professional way.
Regards,
H N Nawbatt