Grenada’s detainees political hot potato

“Tempus fugit.”... Now don’t panic. For those who may be a bit rusty on their Latin or weren’t paying attention in class, it simply means, “Time flies.” Now, how time moves is relative. For example, 20 years is a short time in the life of a nation but it is a long time in the life of a person, especially if the person happens to be “behind bars.” How times flies! It’s now been 20 years since the Grenada revolution, so-called, led by Maurice Bishop et al collapsed miserably and devoured its own entrails. Bishop and a number of his colleagues found themselves with their backs literally to the wall at Fort Rupert where they were gunned down, reportedly on the orders of a faction of the party, led by his deputy Bernard Coard. Seventeen persons (including Bernard Coard and his wife Phylis) were tried, convicted and sentenced for Maurice Bishop’s murder. After 20 years in prison (the only woman is on medical leave) there are efforts to have the 17 released and granted amnesty. As far as I gather, the 17 detainees continue to see themselves as “political prisoners” and even prisoners of war, long after the war is over.

An earlier attempt was in the pipeline to have them released and a public relations exercise was attempted, by having them interviewed by selected journalists, to convey the message that they had been “model prisoners” and did not pose any problems for the society. Something apparently went wrong and the government shelved the idea “for the time being,” — a couple years ago. As one detainee put it, “Politics has me here and politics will keep me here.” There’s more than an element of truth in this. Keith Mitchell has to consider the impact of the release. It has to be carefully managed. It’s not only a question of them being ready to re-enter the society but the society has to be prepared to receive them. There is a cult, posing as a party, calling itself The Maurice Bishop Patriotic Movement. And as far as that group is concerned the 17 detainees should be released only when hell freezes over. But, more seriously, there’s talk of “closure” and “healing.” It’s expected that “closure” could involve, at least, knowing the whereabouts of the remains of Bishop and the others. More than this, that has been one of Grenada’s most traumatic experiences. Added to this, Bishop’s image is that of “the martyred patriot,” whereas that of his killers (or alleged killers, if you prefer) are “bloodthirsty monsters).” I might mention here that would-be tinpot gods and sawdust Caesars don’t realise how important are the journalists and the press as far as their images are concerned. Perhaps they do realise this and that’s why they’re so anxious to close down the press and jail the journalist.

That’s probably why I took another look at what looked like veteran Grenadian journalist Leslie Pierre’s recent outburst: “I hope they never find Bishop’s remains. We don’t need a shrine for Maurice Bishop. The memory of what he did to Grenada is enough. The shame of what he did to Grenada is enough.” This, you must admit, is very strong language from one who is himself aware of the impact that his words can have. Mr Pierre, very early o’clock, felt the full length of Bishop’s political belt. His paper was closed down and he was himself imprisoned for 27 months without charge, trial or hope of due process. Leslie Pierre characterised Bishop as “a criminal dictator” and is incidentally at the forefront of the move to have the 17 detainees released. It’s ironic that Bishop could have come running to the Trinidad press to expose the wounds inflicted on his person by Eric Gairy’s goons and put the Grenada press under “heavy manners,” when he found himself in the saddle. It’s probably some sort of “poetic justice” that when he needed the press most and his very life depended on it, it just wasn’t there. As far as politicians are concerned, you’ve really got to sleep with the fowl to know if it snores. The best advice one could give to those uppity politicians is, “Try to be nice to the people you meet on your way up, you might just happen to meet them on your way down.”

Back to those detainees. They seem to be haunted by Bishop’s ghost and are under the impression that all they have to do is to keep saying, “We’re not criminals, we were military men acting on military orders and addressed what we saw as a military situation with the military options open to us.” The stigma of “assassins” is a difficult one to shed, especially where the victims are seen to be “martyred patriots.” Now you’ll have to forgive me dear Lord if anyone gets the impression that I give two hoots about whether the detainees’ case is on the front burner or even on the stove. It’s not my call anyway. But the Keith Mitchell government should decide whether and how it’s going to handle this hot potato and stop sending mixed signals and put the issue at rest, one way or the other and stop pussyfooting. There will, however, continue to be more questions than answers. Bishop’s antagonists, wishing to curtail his power and influence, should have known that the seemingly affable and charismatic Bishop was accepted by the masses as the “maximum leader” and putting him under house arrest, handcuffed to his bed and only in his underwear was begging for trouble. On being freed by a crowd, a possibly disoriented Bishop led the potential mob to Fort Rupert, a military installation. In that act of lunacy, Bishop might have set the stage for possible civil war with all that this entailed, thereby virtually appending his signature to his own death warrant.