Griffith: UNC ‘unity’ meeting tantamount to ‘political mutiny’

Griffith, who is the representative for the North region of the executive, was responding to statements by UNC Chairman Basdeo Panday and Jack Warner, which suggested that the meeting was an executive decision. Panday stated that Friday’s meeting emanated" from last Wednesday’s executive meeting.

Griffith said he had concerns about the "authenticity and legality" of the meeting as it related to the party’s constitution, and in relation to the manner in which the meeting was convened — "by a select patriotic few." Griffith said he believed that Warner was genuine and honest, but he said the meeting was improperly convened. He said at no time at the executive meeting held last Wednesday was there a discussion about holding such a meeting. "So the question should be asked, as to where and when was this decision made, as I certainly was not there when this decision was made, and as an executive member, I should know," he said.

He said the way things happened left people with no other conclusion than this "clandestine meeting" was an attempt to undermine the political leader, and was tantamount to "political mutiny".

"We seem to have executive members who have double standards. Only two weeks ago, the political leader received a tongue-lashing from two present MPs for having a simple innocent walkabout, and he was boldly told that any political activity must have the input and endorsement from the executive at an executive meeting," Griffith recalled.

He added, "It is quite strange that they can demand that the political leader’s walkabouts require executive approval, yet such a significant action as a meeting with major figures who broke with the party in the past can take place without such executive endorsement." It makes one wonder (whether) the intention was uniting the party, or attempting to show that unity can in fact take place, with or without the political leader’s input."

Griffith also criticised the fact that the meeting was called when UNC political leader Winston Dookeran was out of the country.

Noting that the reason given for holding the meeting on Friday was because Warner had to leave the country on Saturday, and that Dookeran would only be returning after Warner had left, Griffith said the meeting was deemed to be too important to wait for both men to be in the country at the same time. "A choice had to be made between having the political leader or the deputy political leader present." And the decision to have the meeting with the deputy political leader being there and the political leader being absent "is nothing short of madness, as it blatantly means that it was felt that it was more important to have the deputy political leader present at this critical meeting," he said.

"Could such a decision have been made in the UNC just a few months ago?" Griffith asked.

"Can we imagine Wade Mark as chairman liaising with Kamla Persad-Bissessar to hold such a crucial meeting without the involvement, input, approval and worse yet, the attendance of the then Political Leader, Basdeo Panday?" he also asked.

"The answer is obviously no, so we must start to realise and learn a little bit of protocol, teamwork and management , and that it is not the man that you are following, but the post in which he holds.

"If you do not have confidence or faith in him, then do something about it, but for God’s sake, do not disrespect him and the party in an attempt to belittle him and politically assassinate him in similar manner of Brutus and Cassius to Julius Caesar. Because, it is now true to say that that last stab was indeed the unkindest cut of all," Griffith stated.