THE main Opposition People's National Congress Reform (PNC/R) is frowning at allegations that its "announced intention to work for the removal" of the present Government, is seditious.

At the party's weekly news conference yesterday, PNC/R Central Executive member, Mr. Raphael Trotman said that as an opposition party, the PNC/R is "in the business of trying to get the government of the day out of office" and to have itself "as the alternate government".

"(There is nothing wrong with) any statement which says that as an opposition party, we are attempting to remove the Government", he declared.

However, he said the party is not talking about or has ever talked about removal by "force of arms".

"We stand firm that it is our business to expose...oppose...and depose...them (the Government). We will continue to do that and we see nothing wrong with that. We are not saying that we will do so by force of arms," Trotman insisted.

"Throughout every corner of this earth, there have been instances where people feel and have felt that the government sitting on their backs is not what they desire and they have taken moves to force resignations. If that happens, so be it to the (ruling) PPP/Civic", he declared.

Editor's Note: (Report above taken from the Chronicle, June 18, 2002). Please consider our questions below and views.

1) Normal opposition parties are in the business of winning elections-singly or as a coalition. They do not talk about "deposing" or "removing" an elected government - such language is reserved for the use of methods other than elections, like the USA "deposing" Saddam Hussein. But the PNC has never been a normal political party; it never (singly) won an election, and always relied on violence and force of arms, in and out of office, against both Indians and Blacks.

2) Assuming opposition parties are in the business of removing the elected government of the day, why make this obvious statement, and why NOW? The other opposition parties (e.g., WPA-GAP or ROAR) have never done this, and see no need to utter such inflammatory opinions publicly.

3) The main question now becomes: "By what mean does the PNC/R intend to remove the PPP/C government, if it says that it is not by violence/force (that is, 'force of arms')?"

4) What does "force of arms" mean? Does it only mean violence through the army/police, or does it accommodate also for violence used by PNC-networked criminals whose crimes have made Guyana destabilize enough for the PNC to do its dirty works, like making this statement? What matter where and how the violence comes, as long as it disrupts normal life? Isn't it illegal and treasonable if it leads to the overthrown of a legally elected, democratic government? Sure it does.

5) What is the psychological impact of this statement when it hits the mind of the average PNC/R supporter? Is it to act as a prelude/warning to PNC/R to prepare them for the big showdown? To prepare die-hard PNC/R supporters to be ready to strike out at the enemy and the supporters of the enemy?

6) Consider this part of their statement; "…they have taken moves to force resignations"-WHAT moves are these? Do these include the carefully orchestrated criminal acts (possibly the Mash jailbreak) by radical members of the PNC/R, to make Guyana "ungovernable"?

7) This statement could only come from the PNC/R. It shows how powerful the PNC/R is today, that there is nothing that the government can do about it. Further, this statement only demonstrates that if a 52% (majority) electorate cannot be allowed to govern in Guyana, with the PNC/R in "opposition," then it clearly means that NO democratic government can rule; no non-Black/PNC/R government. If this does not tell the supporters of all other political parties something, nothing else will. Separation is the only answer to this kind of right-to-rule politics.

June 21, 2002[Reprinted from
     HOME          <<< Page X                                           TOP                                  Page X>>>                       
© 2001