Dear Editor,
Since pre/post-independence the PNC and its supporters have resorted to violence to solve problems. The PPP and its supporters, in contrast, have pursued the enforcement of their rights and redress of grievances at the courts. Why this different path between the two parties and their supporters in seeking enforcement of their rights? On Friday night last, a peaceful vigil held by the PPP outside Red House was disrupted by Minister Volda Lawrence and a mob at a time when her ministerial colleague Amna Ally is preaching national cohesion.
President Granger’s decree that Red House should be seized and its inhabitants evicted in one day is a travesty of justice. The President made himself lawyer, judge, jury, and enforcer all in one stroke. Fortunately, the coalition Government has been blocked by the courts. Why shouldn’t the PPP be free to protest in peace? Ministry of the Presidency operatives barged into Red House and broke the sign, as well as padlocked the gates as if they were a law unto themselves. This occurred after a court had issued an injunction barring the takeover. The PPP did not reciprocate with violence to enforce their rights.
In spite of all the violence perpetuated on PPP supporters by PNC thugs, what does the PPP do in response? They hold Commissions of Inquiry and proceed to the courts for redress. One party acts primitive and the other goes by the rule of law. In no recent case has the PPP resorted to violence as a means of redressing wrongs. Why? History of experiences of violence shows that when violence is countered with superior violence, there is respect for law and order. Fear drives people to behave themselves. PPP needs to pay attention to that tenet.
The contrast of the two parties is like night to day. The PPP leadership seeks the courts for its justice. The PNC resorts to illegal acts and violence to get its way as in the case of the assault on Red House. Obviously, the AFC/APNU Government does not believe in the constitution or laws.
Rightly so, if the PNC-led Government believes that their case has righteousness, why not act within Guyana’s laws and the constitutions to cancel the lease of the Cheddi Jagan Research Centre? Why resort to violence to prove their case? The answer is the PNC recognises that the PPP is helpless and will cave in to violence. Had the PPP put an end to PNC violence very early on during the 1960s and the 1970s, the violent behaviour of the PNC would have been history.
The PNC coalition shut down Wales Sugar Estate, which impacted thousands of PPP supporters, and yet there were no court challenges or resort to violence. What is the PPP waiting for?
One must ask the question, why the PNC cannot behave in the same manner as the PPP?
What next?
PNC violence in Guyana has a history of being always directed against Indians, and this has gone unchallenged by all good Guyanese citizens. Such a travesty must not be allowed to continue by the ABC countries.
What will it take to make PNC supporters stop such evil actions? Just say “Stop it.”?
Yours truly,
Vassan Ramracha
