On educating PNC Leaders and loyalists
Our Judiciary: Many cringe, as convicts smile
I hereby reminisce briefly about the 1980 to 1992 days when I was part of a small pivotal team contributing to sensitizing and educating (frontline) People’s National Congress (PNC) members about their roles during elections campaigns.
Rigged elections or not, the party was bullish on the mobilisation and preparation of both members and eager supporters who would be the operators, protagonists and visible “face” of actual campaigning. Whether through conceptualizing, providing technical skills or speaking at local meetings or mass rallies.
I helped – after succeeding Victor Forsythe – to fashion speakers’ briefs and other daily advisories meant to promote unified messages through effective, grassroots communication. I even managed to experience “unfortunate humour” when advice was followed – like not to deface property or objects people held in some esteem – until the final week of many a campaign. From the home turf of the already-converted and loyal to hostile “enemy” territory however, the enthusiastic comrades always managed non-violent aggression and strategies.
All that changed after Janet Jagan won the ’97 elections after Cheddi died. I had also had cause to leave PNC activist status for various reasons, around that year.
Those memories flashed through my (political?) psyche as I mingled very briefly with (PNC) APNU/AFC supporters outside the Public Buildings on the afternoon of last Friday’s No-Confidence Motion and vote. Why? Because the words, activities and motions of the rankand–file comrades suggested support and loyalty compromised by ignorance, even vulgarity.
It’s one thing to be enthusiastic, vocal and dramatic in your demonstration of extreme support for your (PNC) party. Even with your gyrations to drumming
They gained law degrees, admission to Bars; then were appointed judges. As Guyana submits to the Rule-of-Law, they are powerful and grand arbiters of what’s legally right and acceptable. Says who? They say so! And they can take all the time they need – to decide – apparently. Because their findings must/should be sound, fair to all sides of a contention.