Minister of Natural Resources, Hon. Vickram Bharrat claims that he is the victim of defamation, and his lawyer has written the alleged slanderer to this effect. Mr. Enrico Woolford, veteran journalist, is the alleged defamer and he is absolutely taking no ownership of anything slanderous or defamatory. This he has made clear in his response to Minister Bharrat’s legal representative.
In a nutshell: no apology, no compensation. None. And, to record his supreme confidence, not ever. Now that both of the parties, Minister Bharrat and journalist Woolford, have made their positions known, the first question is this: what next? Then, how is going to blink and retreat? The third is the straightest of straight lines: who has truth, and the totality of truth, on his side?
Mr. Woolford’s position is that he has truth on his side, and because of that there can and will be no yielding. That is not a gauntlet thrown down, it is a red light to the minister. Come to a dead stop with this missive about apology and compensation to be determined. It is backup and backoff. It is Minister Bharrat’s turn now to deliver his own sortie-legal or whatever form such takes-to Mr. Woolford’s in-the-face, drawn-in-the-line position.
From my perspective, it is more a line drawn in stone, for when I consider his emphasis on that word “ever” then this is shaping up to be a war. More than a war of words, or about who wrote, who threatened the retaliatory, who spoke the language of no retreat, no surrender. This is now a war that hinges on the truth. I take no position on this, regarding who has the real truth, who has more truth on his side, and who has nothing but the truth as his only companion.
To both Minister Bharrat and Mr. Woolford, I share something that each one knows. There is no substitute for truth. We live by it, or we die from lack of it. Truth is oxygen, truth is lifeblood. Mr. Bharrat had his attorney’s letter delivered and broadcast, which impresses me that he may have something going for his cause. Once it is the truth, he shall prevail. Mr. Woolford has responded with his own blanket statement that leaves no loopholes: truth is his shield, truth his weapon. The time will come, as events unfold, as to whose truth is more infallible, as in 100% proof.
Truth will be the messenger. Truth will be the defender (and aggressor) of either man; it cannot be both of them at the same time. And however, this shapes up and shakes out, truth in all its pristine, sacred brilliance will be the final arbiter. We need some unvarnished truth in this country, and not just from ministers and media practitioners, but from each one of us. Whether national leader or national media contributor, truth must be our mantra, our essence, our exclusive guiding force. We have it or we don’t. For the most part, Guyana suffers from a dearth of truth, even the death of it, both in high places and low ones.
In laying this out, there is this insistent thought that wouldn’t rest. How will Minister Bharrat prove his truth about intervention and questioning, any form of pausing and interrupting his passage? In the same vein, by what means will Mr. Woolford deliver the strengths of his truth(s), i.e., about stopping and searching for answers by US federal authorities? There is only one eyewitness, one expert authority, to this clash about which one of the two Guyanese has truth on his side. It is the US government itself. It would be interesting to hear what emanates from that inarguable source.
The US government is now so intertwined, so inseparable, from Guyanese affairs that I cannot see how it could remain silent or distant in a matter of this magnitude, one so poised at this crucial juncture. The keen in Guyana should be quick to note that I have bypassed diplomatic immunity and passports (the various levels of protections offered by such), as well as protocols and standing conventions. This Bharrat-Woolford dispute revolves around, is built upon, and given life by one thing and one thing only. It is truth with and all in caps: T-R-U-T-H. It cannot be the truth, as attested by Mr. Bharrat alone, or Mr. Woolford alone. The truth about the alleged slowing and questioning of Minister Bharrat resides solely with the US government. It could be the Department of Homeland Security, or the FBI.
It is time that truth be put to the test in Guyana. It will be a test of fire and endurance. May the man, Vickram Bharrat or Enrico Woolford, who has impeccable and incontestable truth in his corner, in his words of defense, conquer the high ground and set a standard for us. Truth is more than an affirmative defense in matters of defamation. Truth is the best defense; it is the only one.
