PNCR Leader, Robert Corbin, at his press Conference held on January 16, 2008, sought to explain his party’s position on the question of the missing weapons, which according to the Guyana Defence Force (GDF), was handed over to the Ministry of National Development and Mobilisation during the 1976 to 1979 period.

At his press conference, Corbin said:
“The matter should be examined in the context of the security conditions that existed at the time in our country. The question of the issuing of weapons to state agencies. In the seventies has a specific content. This was a troubling and challenging period in our history”.

Mere words. Corbin would not tell us what was so “troubling and challenging” about that period, save to hang his hat on an external factor viz: “yet another challenge for Venezuela!”

After poking several political jabs at the PPP for its role during that period, Corbin then in a slight of hand manner, makes reference to the People’s Militia and projects it as the brainchild of Dr. Jagan.

Why he did this in a debate about missing weapons, is anybody’s guess. Only Corbin knows what he is talking about.

And knowing I will be at risk if I attempted to interpret Mr. Corbin’s explanation about the passing of the weapons from the Guyana Defence Force to the Ministry of National Development and Mobilisation, I prefer to leave this aspect of the exposé alone and await the revelation that will flow when Mr. Corbin goes before the Board of Inquiry which is yet to be officially launched.

What I would restrict myself to at this point is to address Corbin’s claim that during that period:

** the PPP promoted instability

** agreed to hold talks with the PNC

** Dr. Jagan was suspicious of the GDF

** Dr. Jagan proposed the formation of a People’s Militia

FIRST POINT (that the PPP promoted instability):
After the 1973 rigged elections the PPP launched a campaign of civil resistance and non-cooperation and quite justifiably so.

Two of its activists were shot and killed defending the ballot boxes while several leaders had been detained and arrested. A wave of repression was mounted fundamentally against the PPP.

No other Opposition Party suffered as the PPP did during that period.
The PPP was seen by the PNC as the main threat to its hold on political power.

From then on, the PNC publicly branded anyone who opposed them - “destabilisers”, “saboteurs,” “trouble makers” and “enemies of the State”.

Five years later, the infamous referendum was held to postpone the 1978 elections. The official symbol handed to the opposition was a Mouse, while the official symbol for the PNC was a House.

This was political cynicism of the highest order.
Paramountcy of the Party was declared and a de facto one Party State was established.

Apart from the fact that the State had become an instrument for accumulation and gain for the PNC as a Party and its Leaders, it was transformed into the executive arm of the ruling PNC while Party bodies fulfilled several functions of state organs.

Party and State activities became indistinguishable. This surreal situation was eventually consummated with the establishment of a Government Agency named – ‘The Office of the General Secretary and Ministry of National Development’, situated on Camp Street where the CLICO Headquarters is now going up.

By 1978, the political struggle for democracy and free and fair elections sharpened with strikes in the Bauxite industry, and the rail-roading of the Administration of Justice Bill (1978) through the National Assembly. The Bill restricted the right to trial by Jury and placed considerable powers in the hands of Magistrates.

Then emerged the Committee in Defence of Democracy (CDD), which grouped several political parties, trade unions and civic and religious organisations together.

In response to this development PNC thugs were unleashed against the CDD at a meeting held at North Road and Orange Walk, Bourda.

With sticks, pieces of pipes and rubber hose, PNC thugs rained blows on defenceless persons attending and speaking at that meeting.

Father Darke was there; he narrowly escaped on his bicycle but this was not to be for long, for in mid 1979, almost one year later, he was stabbed to death by known House of Israel thugs in Brickdam in front of the St Stanislaus College. (There is a famous photograph somewhere which shows his assailant about to pounce upon him with a long knife in his hand).

By July 1979, sixty six (66) prominent individuals drawn from the State bureaucracy, the Church, the business community and professional bodies signed a document calling for the formation of a broad-based Government of National Reconciliation.

With their backs against the wall and the hand-writing on the same wall becoming clearer and bolder, Forbes Burnham, the then Leader of the PNC and President of Guyana declared unapologetically - “Our steel is sharper, all we can promise them is perhaps a death less painful than that of Judas Iscariot”.

This was the state of affairs that obtained in our country during the 1976-1979 period. Corbin lived through that period. He was in the thick of it!

So when he said that that period in our country’s history was a “troubling and challenging” one, it must certainly be these events he was referring to and not only the external factor about another threat of aggression from Venezuela.

SECOND POINT: (that the PPP agreed to hold talks with the PNC)
A fundamental political antecedent that preceded the above-mentioned events was the marked shift in 1975 in the PPP’s position - from Civil Resistance and Non-cooperation to Critical Support.

Two years later, the PPP boldly called for the establishment of a National Patriotic Front and a National Front Government.

Such a Government was to replace the PNC Government by a truly representative Government through free and fair elections.

Moreover, in the PPP’s view, such a Government could be constituted by a single party as was the case with the PPP Governments in 1953, 1957-1961 and 1961-1964; a pre-election alliance or Front of political parties and groups or a post election coalition of parties.

The PPP was inclined to support the third option knowing that it would win the majority of votes at a free and fair elections.

And based on the “winner does not take all, politics”, viz, that other political parties and social forces could join in forming the Government.

The PPP made it very clear that it would not accept any formula which is not based on democracy and free and fair elections.

It was in the context of this situation when the PNC wrote the PPP a letter calling for “constructive dialogue” and its desire to pursue “fruitful and effective cooperation in the interest of National Development, Security and Socialist Construction”.

The PPP responded stating that its objectives were the same but with the National Patriotic Front and National Front Government (NFG) being pre-requisites for achieving the said objectives.

Prior to this written invitation from the PNC to enter into talks, previous efforts had been made to forge a common front against manoeuvres by external forces to destabilise the situation in Guyana due to the progressive internal and external policies the PNC had been pursuing at that time.

However, these talks did not achieve any success because of disagreements over the allocation of budgetary resources.

To reflect the PPP’s position, the Mirror newspaper had published an Editorial captioned, “Money for guns – Not for Bread”.

The PNC was upset about this and demanded that the Editorial be withdrawn as a pre-condition for the continuation of the talks. The PPP refused to withdraw the Editorial and the talks collapsed.

These talks were a harbinger to the subsequent talks that were triggered by the letter from the Burnham Administration but which ended abruptly with Desmond Hoyte soon after he assumed office.

THIRD POINT: (that Jagan was suspicious of the GDF)
Dr. Jagan’s suspicion of the GDF was not personal nor based on ill-will. It merely mirrored a perception that obtained in the country at that time.

The Army was used against striking workers; it had intervened in the 1973 election and took control of the ballot boxes. The Chief-of-Staff of the GDF at the 1977 Biennial Congress of the PNC openly pledged loyalty to the ruling Party.

The militarisation of Guyana’s politics had become a living reality. Were such things to happen today, what would the PNC think of the Army?

The PPP had called for a reduction of the large and costly GDF and for the creation of country wide People’s Militia.

The Party advocated that Military personnel should be trained for specific jobs in the productive sector before any reduction took place.
So much for Jagan’s “suspicion” of the Army.

FOURTH POINT: (Jagan proposed the formation of the People’s Militia)
The connection between Jagan, the People’s Militia and the Ministry of National Development and the disappearance of weapons can only be explained by Mr. Corbin.

Suffice it to say that the PPP did call for the establishment of a People’s Militia in 1975-1976, while the PNC Government in 1976 did announce its formation in May 1976.

Never-the-less, it failed to implement in practice its own propaganda slogan – ‘Every citizen a soldier’.

Perhaps it meant only those citizens who were trusted by the ruling party. Also it was probably fearful that were it to establish a genuine country-wide People’s Militia, the guns might have turned against it given the mood of the people at that time.

It may have been Jagan’s idea to have a People’s Militia, but the Jagan I knew would certainly not have countenanced the distribution of weapons to that body and not have such weapons accounted for.

Now with the exposé about the distribution of guns by the PNC Administration to what Mr. Corbin described as a “state Agency”, more questions than answers have now arisen.

And even if we were to give Mr. Corbin the benefit of the doubt that there were indeed justifiable grounds to issue the weapons to a Government Ministry, the question remains - why after the easing of tension between Guyana and Venezuela were the weapons not handed back to the Guyana Defence Force and officially accounted for?
CLEMENT J. ROHEE
MINISTER OF HOME AFFAIRS