Rodney CoI would never have gotten off the ground if political consensus was sought on terms of reference

Dear Editor,

In the November 16, 2019, issue of the Stabroek News Mr. Kwayana made some remarks on the Rodney Commission of Inquiry’s work that need a response.

He was critical of me for not seeking to have a consensus with the PNC/APNU and WPA as to the ‘Terms of Reference’ of the Commis-sion.

I felt then, and still do now, that if I had sought the consensus, the Commission would have never gotten off the ground.

Not only did I not consult the APNU and WPA but I did not raise this matter with the PPP either. I took that decision to work with the family, who suffered long and the most by the tragedy of 1980.

The Terms of Reference (ToR) were worked out between the Attorney General, then Mr. Anil Nandlall, and the Rodney family. The term ‘Intellectual Author’ that Mr. Kwayana commented on cynically, in the ToR if copied from Fidel Castro as Mr. Kwayana noted, is not important, most important was that Walter Rodney’s family agreed with it and it captured an important aspect of the investigation.

I should point out that to the best of my knowledge it was the first time that the family was directly involved in the process.  In all previous attempts to establish such a Commission, the WPA said it was representing the family.

In speaking to the family, I found out that no member of the family ever asked that an Inquiry not be held as was told to President Jagdeo by Dr. Roopnaraine when he was about to establish such a Commission in 2005.

I wish, also, to say that when myself and Mrs. Rodney spoke of the matter, I was not seeking any political gains contrary to Mr. Kwayana’s beliefs. Uppermost in my mind was her request to bring the issue to closure.

Indeed, in the process of our conversation I said to Mrs. Rodney that I wanted her to go into the Inquiry with her eyes wide open. I asked her if she was aware that many of her late husband’s closest comrades had migrated into the PNC and may not be willing to fully cooperate. She said she was aware but still wanted to proceed.

I, too, who lived through that period was anxious to have this done. The only reason that I did not initiate it immediately on taking office was because of my mistaken belief that the family did not want it.

So, Mr. Kwayana that is the simple fact.

The other issue I want to clarify is the question of Donald Rodney’s charges.

When this matter was raised with me, I immediately agreed to wipe out the charge. However, the Attorney General at the time told me that Donald Rodney was charged and convicted in his absence. Therefore, I could not just wipe out those charges.

He recommended that the next best way available to me was to pardon Donald Rodney. That is what I did.

I understand that the family is not happy with that I understand their feelings on this matter but that was the advice I got and I acted in accordance with that advice.

Mr. Kwayana also said that “… notably absent from the ToR was any reference, direct or indirect, to redress for the losses imposed on the Rodney family with its very young children…”  He is right.

However, he went on to say that “…the consideration of redress would not be absent from the President’s mind”.

He is wrong here. This matter was never raised with me until late in the Inquiry, that is, sometime in 2015. My attitude then was to let the Inquiry conclude and we would deal with it immediately after.

I am of the view that the family should be compensated. The report, even though truncated has justified that.

Mr. Kwayana then joined with his colleagues in the WPA to excuse the PNC for terminating the Inquiry immediately after taking power. He wrote; “…. President Granger … new to the political arena, was in a difficult situation… The Party he led apparently began to press for the immediate closure of the Inquiry…”  This, of course, is sheer speculation.

Since Mr. Kwayana resorted to speculate to defend the PNC, allow me to speculate also. I believe that Mr. Granger could have been afraid of what could be exposed of his own conduct. He must have been uncomfortable too with Mr. McLean’s unfinished evidence.  His name was just beginning to surface during the McLean’s cross-examination.

He must have had concerns for others close to him too. After all, Mr. Harmon was the Deputy Head of the Army’s Intelligence at the time. What he knows would be of great public interest and he could have been summoned to give evidence.

The statement by Mr. Kwayana that Granger was new to the political arena is not correct either. Mr. Granger himself recently revealed that he was a member of the PNC for about fifty years. At one time he served as the Political Commissioner in the army.  This was in the era of paramountcy.

There are other points he made that I would respond to some other time, not to divert too far.  However, I must say how sad I felt on reading his letter for clearly, he too has become an apologist for the PNC. How tragic.

To conclude, I honestly believe that had I taken a different course in establishing the Inquiry, it would have never gotten off the ground. It would have been bogged down in the development of the ToR.

After all the WPA was and is now taking leadership from the PNC and they are now in a situation where they have to defend and protect the PNC.

That is why Roopnaraine made the statement that Rodney was accumulating arms. It also allowed himself and many other leaders of the WPA to cover themselves with that fig leaf. This has now ended in the betrayal of Walter Rodney.

Kwayana’s letter has only served to reinforce that view.

Yours faithfully,

Donald Ramotar

Former President