One-dimensional thinking in TT

There is, for example, no question in law about the position taken by a representative legal body that the army needs to work under the supervision of the police and that its present role is illegal. But what of the other side of the coin in which it is reported that many in the communities under siege welcome the presence of the army in their neighbourhood as it has resulted in a marked decrease in criminality, a position supported in many call-in programmes and even endorsed by a well known politician from the area in question and by a popular columnist in one of the dailies?

What of another instance in which there is insistence by a high official that the Red Steel should not append the name TT to is title. The argument is that the team is in fact a “private franchise” which may have some merit. But again what of the other side to the argument that TT identifies with this team which wears its colours and has the majority of this country’s players and draws its enjoyment out of such identification as much as the Guyana Amazon Warriors and others do?

But, as one sports writer puts it, is it a matter of deflection in the case of the main contender or a matter of jealousy from the local cricket fraternity which is playing no significant role with the Red Steel and the whole objection is a matter of a storm in a teacup? The greater good is for TT supporters to feel one with the team wearing its colours and what better way than with a team named after the country?

As for the first issue, there is so much for the legal body to comment upon in terms of the dispensation of justice or the lack of it and in the second instance, for the principals against the TT element appended to the title to focus on, rather than niggling over the letter of the law and not the spirit of the law.

Dr Errol Benjamin

via email