Unusual request for a face-to-face meeting

first_imgDear Editor,The unusual request for a face-to-face meeting with those interested in selling Guyana’s oil and Granger’s minions is a brazen attempt to foster corruption. Brokers do not need to sit in a room with Ministers to offer and agree on terms. The offer of bribes and kickbacks by way of phone, text or otherwise recordable media is foolhardy and can only be done safely in hushed whispers face-to-face. There can be no other reason for the demand for a meeting with brokers in Guyana. None!Contrary to local news reports, it was not Bloomberg that broke the news of this attempt at an unusual arrangement, Leader of the Opposition Bharrat Jagdeo informed the media of this during his weekly press conference on Thursday, December 12, 2019. I recognise that the local press is hampered in following up on information provided by the Opposition by the unavailability of anyone in Government to ask questions. If you cannot reach them, you cannot question them. The entire APNU/AFC cabal is mimicking the strategy adopted by David Granger, a perverse game of ‘hide and seek’ played on the national stage.Editor, the representatives of the company that secures this bid should be forewarned that any contract they sign with the caretaker Government is not worth the paper and may indeed be very costly to their reputation and bottom line very shortly. I do not expect any reputable firm to engage in this most unsavoury process outlined by the Granger Administration for the sale of three million barrels of profit oil. Guyanese are not without knowledge or means to pursue any firm that engages in any form of corruption. Take warning; the world has become a small place for the corrupt.The Guyanese populace has been very patient with the obduracy of Mr Granger; he would be foolish to think that this will extend to his attempt to engage in corrupt practice with our national patrimony. On the off-chance that I am wrongly imputing motives to Mr Granger, he needs to demonstrate that he is not a crook or senile and step in and put a stop to this weekend’s meetings. The redemptive effect of staving off this blatant attempt at corruption by his minions may well be the salve Granger’s soul during his remaining years. We are in a period of advent; repent!Respectfully,Robin Singhlast_img read more

GOL Dropped Rape Cases against Foreign Suspects

first_imgJudge Ceaineh Clinton Johnson has admitted releasing on bail two Lebanese rape convicts and two others suspected of the same crime, despite media reports putting the number higher.Rape is a non-bailable offense under the new law, but Judge Johnson, who is one of the few female judges in the country, yesterday defended her decision, blaming it on the Liberian government.According to her, the prosecution informed her that government was not interested in continuing with the cases.A Lebanese national Jaafar Bashir, 44, who was charged for raping young Liberian children within the age range of 7 and 15, was released on a US$25,000 bail by Judge Johnson.Another Lebanese, Ali Saksouk, 21, was accused of raping a 13-year old child, but he was also released on bail by Judge Johnson.Two Lebanese rape convicts, Anthony Kassabli and his father, Dib Edmond Kassabli were convicted of gang rape, but also released by Judge Johnson on bail. Anthony was released for health reasons, while his father was given executive clemency by President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf.However, in her charge to lawyers, judges, prospective jury and party litigants yesterday at the August 2015 opening of Criminal Courts A, B, C, D and E, Judge Johnson in a strongly worded statement said, “the press published that Lebanese nationals were the only ones who were granted bail in Court ‘E,’ but from the records of the court, out of the forty-two bails granted, only three were Lebanese nationals.”Criminal Court ‘E’ is solely responsible to hear and decide rape cases.Judge Johnson clarified that the three Lebanese were freed based upon a state application to ‘nolle prosequi’ (to waive the case), “but the news was that the court was just freeing criminals.”‘Nolle prosequi’ is an admission made by prosecution that they cannot prove the charges against the defendants, because available evidence demonstrates that an accused is innocent.The declaration can be made either before or after the start of a trial, meaning the case against the defendant will then be dropped.Further, in her charge Judge Johnson said the Criminal Court E’s decision was also based on what she considered as “change of venue.”“When a change of venue was requested and granted, newspapers reported that they will be watching the judge, who transferred the case. If they were to verify the news they would have presented the truth to the general public on the case,” she averred.She also used the occasion to advise media institutions, saying, “We know that we now have the Freedom of Information Act, but the dignity of the court will, and must at all times be respected. Any reporting that has the tendency to compromise any side of a case is prejudicial to the safety of our land.”Judge Johnson continued, “We expect you to carefully check your information, balance and or verify them from the court before reporting to the general public.”Throughout her deliberation, the female Judge did not mention the name of a particular media institution.Cautioning lawyers earlier, Judge Johnson said they, too, have a responsibility to ensure that respect is given to the courts; therefore, they should avoid unjust causes of unmeritorious reporting.Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)last_img read more