Kaieteur News
PAGE 04
Saturday April 13, 2019
Kaieteur News Printed and Published by National Media & Publishing Company Ltd. 24 Saffon Street, Charlestown, Georgetown, Guyana. Publisher: GLENN LALL Editor: Adam Harris Tel: 225-8465, 225-8491. Fax: 225-8473, 226-8210
EDITORIAL
The fight against extradition
O
n Thursday, British police bundled Julian Assange out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, his refuge of almost seven years. With his emergence into daylight, so too came some clarity on the case which the US has been pursuing against him, and on which it seeks his extradition. The indictment relates to the secret military and diplomatic files provided by Chelsea Manning, the army whistleblower, which unveiled shocking US abuses and shed light on corrupt and repressive governments worldwide. That Ms Manning is once again in jail, for refusing to give evidence to a secret grand jury in a WikiLeaks investigation, is a disgrace. The importance of the material, published by the Guardian, the New York Times and others, was undeniable. But subsequently we and others strongly disagreed with Mr Assange’s decision to bulk-publish unredacted documents. Two obstacles initially paused the US pursuit. The first was Ecuador’s decision to grant him asylum. A change in government has led it to rescind that protection, on the promise he would not be extradited to potentially face the death penalty. The second was the Obama administration’s conclusion that pursuing him for publishing the files would set a dangerous precedent, imperilling press freedoms protected by the first amendment. As a candidate, Donald Trump declared his love for WikiLeaks when the organisation published emails stolen by Russian state hackers from the Democratic National Committee. But six months later, after WikiLeaks released information on the CIA’s hacking operations, the service’s then director Mike Pompeo declared it a “hostile intelligence service” and the US described arresting Mr Assange as a priority. US authorities say they are charging him on the grounds of conspiracy to access a computer, rather than for the publication of the material obtained. This is an important distinction. The high court last year ruled against the extradition of Lauri Love, accused of breaking into US government websites, in a judgment hailed as setting a precedent for trying hacking suspects in the UK, though the circumstances were very different. The US may also add further charges to the sheet. But it would be naive to regard this charge as the cause of the extradition request, rather than the technical grounds for it. And while Mr Assange is accused in this case of assisting in the cracking of a password, many will fear that the conspiracy charge could be more broadly applied, particularly by an administration so hostile to a free, independent press. Mr Assange now faces up to a year in prison for skipping bail. He was wrong to do so. He entered the Ecuadorian embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden, where he faced allegations of rape and molestation (which he denies), citing fears that Stockholm would hand him to the US. It would be entirely appropriate for Swedish prosecutors to reopen their investigation, as the lawyer representing one of his accusers has requested. None of this alters the dangers of agreeing to his extradition to the US. The case of Assange has implications for some Guyanese who would have broken the law in other countries and seek to hide here. There is the Bisram case. He allegedly became complicit in a murder of a man who rejected his advance. He then fled to the United States where he is fighting extradition. Unlike Assange, he cannot claim victimization by the state. The state has not accused him of treason. Like the United States Guyana has the death penalty so he cannot use that argument to avoid deportation. Then there is the Guyanese who committed murder in the United States and escaped to Guyana. He too is fighting deportation on many grounds. One of them is a denial of his name.
Editor’s Note; If your sent letter was not published and you felt its contents were valid and devoid of libel or personal attacks, please contact us by phone or email.
Freddie’s linking Lincoln Lewis’s statement to that of white fascism is harsh and a quantum leap DEAR EDITOR, In Monday’s Kaieteur News, in his popular column, Freddie Kissoon launched a broadside against an article in Sunday’s Kaieteur News written by Lincoln Lewis. I am a fan of Freddie, but I believe his linking Lincoln Lewis’s statement to that of white fascism is harsh and a quantum leap. While I appreciate the philosophical underpinnings o f F r e d d i e K i s s o o n ’s contention, we must see things in its present context, at all times seek moderation and avoid intemperate language. The above applies to all sides. It is fair to assume that Lincoln Lewis was seeking to solidify our Independence, preserve our pride as a nation state, protect our patrimony and vindicate the sacrifice and humiliation of our ancestors. It is right and proper that we welcome Investors from everywhere – like everything else and everywhere else you’ve got the good, the not so good and the bad. The right of an Independent people is to ensure that the exploitation of our natural resources benefits the Investor and more particularly, benefits the people of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana.
We s e e w h a t h a s happened in the Indian Islands, Africa, Latin America and elsewhere. We m u s t n e v e r countenance disrespect of our workers by others who come with money-bags and sometimes unfulfilled promises. On the question of Immigration, we cannot compare our looming challenges with experiences in Europe, USA and elsewhere. Guyana is a small country with less than a million souls, and we have not reached the point where we provide adequate free education to all of our children, satisfactory health services, security, water, e l e c t r i c i t y a n d transportation. Many of our families still double up for want of sufficient housing. Whenever an Immigrant crosses our border, north, south, east or west, they are likely coming with little or nothing, but will require some of those services referred to above. It is appropriate therefore, that we discuss this matter fully and not see it as a simple matter and talk about fascism. On a lighter note, I remember as a youngster that very often at lunch or dinner time some old uncle, aunty or
old friend would drop in; the practice was that your parent would remove the choicest chunk of meat from your plate to give the uninvited visitor. I soon learnt that after meals were served and grace was said I consumed my meat before the rest of items on the plate. That was a child employing a sensible operation for survival. Why should growing children give up their protein to the visitor? A universal wisdom is survival. I believe that this is not a black and white situation (forgive the pun). The question really is how many persons can Guyana absorb without placing an additional burden on the fragile fabric of our society. Let us carry on the debate, examine facts and figures and avoid emotional outbursts. By the way, Freddie is right, speaking for myself, all of my children live abroad, but in each and every case they sought opportunities that were available in a much larger society that was willing to utilize their skills and knowledge. With a few exceptions, the Guyanese who are abroad function in circumstances with a much larger society
needed then. So that is not the point. With respect to Canada, referred to by Freddie, I wonder if he has read Kari Levitt’s book, “Silent Surrender” where she deals with Multinational Corporation in Canada, published in 1970. Thanks to the alertness of successive Canadian Prime Ministers, some of her predictions of gloom were not materialized. The book is worth scrutiny in view of our present circumstances, since there are many parallels and lessons be learnt. Let us do nothing and think nothing to betray our ancestors and let down our succeeding generations. We don’t want an Independence with a Flag and an Anthem but as one of our earlier Leaders said ‘we do not control (the commanding heights) of our economy.’ Remember the days when BG was translated to mean Bookers Guyana and not British Guiana. A truism because Bookers then was in control of the life and fortunes of our people. To Freddie and Lincoln, let’s talk to avoid any form of re-colonisation, the dismemberment of our traditional values, and the disfigurement of our families and communities. Hamilton Green
The knowledge-based society and Exxon’s training and skills development program DEAR EDITOR, I take the informed view that Gov’t should not have to mandate training initiatives in a company, especially a foreign company operating in the local economy. Training should be built into the arrangements between the company and the country, and the government’s role should be as enforcer. If we look back at many of the contracts under which foreign companies operated in Guyana during 1980s and ‘90s, we would see that a training component was present in each. The provision of training programs for new or upgrading skills benefitted both, the company and Guyanese. The same kind or better arrangements should be expected today of Exxon or other foreign firms operating in Guyana.
The world is now engrossed in the idea that firms are increasingly becoming knowledge-based and network-driven, and the impacts such innovations may have on the populace in specific contexts. Today, a n a t i o n ’s w e l f a r e a n d competitive advantage depend heavily on tacit knowledge, skills and innovative capacity of employees. This emerging economy is characterized by the need for continuous learning of both codified information and the competencies in its use. Thus, individuals with h i g h - r e l e v a n c e qualifications and training have a key role in managing and sustaining the ‘knowledge-driven’ economy. Companies in America, Britain, Japan and elsewhere
take pride in the training of their employees. In many of the huge corporations, as much as 20 percent of the budget was allocated for research, training and staff development. At job interviews, one of the first things that the interviewers would mention as part of the firm’s package(s), is the opportunity for training, both internal and external, to boost performance(s) and promotional opportunities. In 2016, the law department at the University of Guyana had commenced preparation of new courses, and had submitted one on oil and gas to the relevant body for consideration and implementation. When I left in 2017, it was still receiving or awaiting attention. Further, I had asked Professor Pollard, who was at the time teaching
International Environmental Law, among other courses, to attend discussions and public events organized by Exxon. Professor Pollard willingly attended and reported that he had twice raised the issue of training for Guyanese. He queried whether any plan(s) was in place and told the gatherings that given the imminence of oil operations, Exxon should indulge in training activities to prepare Guyanese for smooth entry into the emerging oil and gas sector. Exxon officials reportedly stated that training would come at a later stage. It would be interesting to hear whether Exxon has since started/encouraged/paid for such training. In a nutshell, all smart firms incorporate training programs in their activities to (Continued on page 6)