Where we stand‎ > ‎News & Comment‎ > ‎

FELONS IN HIGH PLACES By Eugene Reynald

posted 9 Jan 2019, 05:16 by Gerry Kangalee
Image result for trinidad freedom of information actThe very few PNM friends I tolerate have been admonishing me – or at least trying to, for referring to Rowley and his Cabinet sycophants as a criminals, felons and outlaws. I tried to explain it to them verbally but being totally conditioned by the immoral, unintelligent and racist PNM dogma (in response to the same from the UNC) they have been unable to understand my reasoning.

I however record it below in a very simple form not so much to reform them but to make my position clear in logic and give them an opportunity to respond in writing…knowing that they cannot and will not.

Criminals, Felons and Outlaws (CFOs) are persons who function outside the Law. My dictionary tells me so and so does my Google search.

Rowley runs the Cabinet and it is therein where Policy is determined. It has to be so because that body enjoys privileges and immunities in Law that protects each of its members. It operates somewhat like a gang, but out of reach of the Law and its deliberations are carried out in secret and without input from citizens.

Its decisions inform the behaviour of all his appointees in Cabinet, all State owned Enterprises and the lives of all citizens. For instance its decision to spend some 300m dollars to build a National Oncology Centre some 12 years ago - and as of today have not delivered on even the basic structure, would have resulted in the deaths of an untold number of citizens from cancer whose lives could have been saved if the Centre - as planned, was completed and operational.

There is a Law in this country called the FOI Act which, inter alia, allows citizens to request and obtain information with few exceptions, from Rowley, his appointees and other public officials.

I, and several other citizens, have made requests for information by way of this Act and these requests have either not been responded to or have been unreasonably denied. Rowley has at least one such request from me and has not yet responded after several months, and other persons he has appointed exhibit the same behaviour.

Afra Raymond made a FOIA request of him and had to take the matter to Court to get the information he requested. Rowley waited until the eleventh hour - just before the Court decided on the Matter, to withdraw his defence and accede to the request from Afra.

We the citizenry paid all of Rowley’s costs for what was an attempt to oppress and frustrate one of us. Think about that one! I am sure that Al Rawi is smarting over this Afra Judgement and others, and must be in his closet drafting Laws to make legal the oppression that he and Rowley are obviously always about.

Rowley thinks that by withdrawing the matter at the eleventh hour when he saw his “ass was grass” he did not commit a crime or felony; but he did do crime by simply refusing to provide the information in the first place in keeping with the stipulations of the FOI Act and only doing so after both Afra and the State spent a considerable lot of money, effort and time in bringing the Matter to Court.

The latter alone suggests forethought and malicious intent on the part of Rowley but for some reason the Court chose to overlook that. So Rowley will do the crime over and over again and is doing just that as I write. Of course he also yielded because he might have had to sit on a witness stand and defend his act of illegality which he clearly did not have the anatomy, courage or conviction to do.

We, the people, paid for all the costs for Rowley’s crime including some of the costs incurred by Afra (one is never awarded one’s full costs by the Court). The obvious conclusion to be drawn from this is that Rowley knew he was breaking the Law but decided to take a citizen, who was exercising his rights in Law, the full distance; in the hope that he would give up in frustration or would have been unable to afford the costs charged directly and indirectly by the Courts for delivering Justice to citizens.

Most citizens do not have the financial resources or the commitment to hold the course that Afra did and this is exploited by Rowley and his appointees. The Courts are supposed to help but the cost of getting there is frustrating, expensive and unaffordable to most citizens as Rowley and his appointees know and this in part contributes to the high incidence of crime and frustration in the country and gives Devant and the Opposition perch on high ground.

What Rowley and his Cabinet appointees do to citizens who they are there to serve is unconscionable, ungodly and criminal and their sycophants, in advising and supporting them also deserve to be called felons and outlaws for the part they play.
Comments