Friday, October 7, 2011

It was Corbin who wanted Jagdeo to help him persue his personal vendetta by removing Vincent Alexander from GECOM.

A STATEMENT issued by the Office of the President last evening said that Robert Corbin has surfaced, and “has made quite passionate criticisms of the president, accusing him of lying and providing misinformation to the Guyanese public.”
In response to an article by Corbin published in yesterday’s issue of the Kaieteur News, headlined ‘Jagdeo misled nation about Broadcasting Committee’, the Office of the President statement said:

“The facts surrounding his claim are as follows: Since 2003, Mr. Corbin has sought to get President (Bharrat) Jagdeo to remove from office the appointments of the then leader of the Opposition Mr. Desmond Hoyte from the constitutional commission GECOM, and the statutory committee, the Advisory Committee on Broadcasting (ACB).
“Mr. Corbin indicated that he had lost confidence and wanted to replace the commissioners and the committee members’ appointed by Mr. Hoyte. “President Jagdeo after being provided with legal advice rejected Mr. Corbin’s advancement; that was since 2003.It is clear today that, based on his outburst, that Mr. Corbin has his own bleak intentions and was seizing the opportunities that were available in the wake of the suspension of the licence of CNS Channel 6.
“The licencees of CNS Channel 6 clearly infringed their licence, the laws and Constitution of Guyana. They admitted to the infringement and offered public apology so the protests that called for mercy had some basis; but Mr. Corbin’s attacks were based on questioning the legitimacy and the constitutionality of the ACB, and had its roots in the insistent request he had made since 2003 to have the Hoyte appointments, Mr. Case, as in the case of the ACB and Mr. Alexander, in the case of GECOM, unilaterally and without cause removed from these two bodies.
“Those are the facts of the matter. Mr. Sharma sought legal interventions and the fact that the court did not support the injunction that was originally granted to Mr. Sharma, preventing the ACB from functioning, was clear evidence that the constitutionality of the ACB was respected by Mr. Sharma, his lawyers and definitely by the Office of the President; thus his contentions that the president lied, misinformed and withheld information from the general public should be treated with the scorn that they deserve; and indeed it should invite questions about Mr. Corbin’s sincerity in addressing the issue at the bilateral level between the Opposition and the Government of Guyana”.

No comments:

Post a Comment