Dear Editor,
In adversarial forms of politics, as Guyana’s is, the acrimony and disdain for, and between, opposing sides is always very palpable. One is simply not expected to admire or revere anyone from the “other side”. In the case of Dr. Roger Luncheon however, one could not escape the obvious reality that he was an enigma who commanded respect.
I have had countless close encounters and engagements with Dr. Luncheon, and in all he would remind you that he was no regular “banna” – to use one of his favourite expressions.
For three years, a small group, representing the PPP/C and PNCR met quietly in dialogue to discuss a range of issues arising out of the Herdmanston Accord process. It was hard not to get to know each other on a more personal level. Though political views and positions remained unassailable, we all came away with a better appreciation and understanding of each other. Roger Luncheon, in those meetings, never failed to entertain or disappoint.
At his press conferences, he spoke in a very circuitous way and one had to develop an art to decipher his language. He wasn’t known to lie, but didn’t make it easy to understand what he was saying; especially when he was dealing with a thorny subject. If you took the time to dissect his words, all one needed to know was intricately revealed. A most memorable example of this was when he coined the phrase “phantom force” in the heyday of the killings, by stating at a press conference: “…there is reasonably plausible evidence that there is a phantom force involved in killings, and it is not the security forces.” In those words was the first official acknowledgement of the killings that were plaguing the nation, and the source of them.
On a more personal note, during the height of the 2011 elections campaign, I once accompanied a colleague’s relative to meet with him at 6 am, to discuss possible government support in a time of personal need of the colleague’s family. At that meeting, though we were publicly locked in political battle, Dr. Luncheon produced a masterclass on the medical condition and outcomes my colleague was dealing with, and another masterclass on humanity. There was not a hint of rancour, bitterness or arrogance on his part. It was easy to take the low road and hit his opponents when in distress. In the end, he calmly said, “we will help”. I came away from that meeting with the conviction that though we would be embattled, we must always maintain a sense of humanity.
May his soul rest in peace.
Yours truly,
Raphael Trotman
