Coup probe to protect TT

Patrick Manning must surely be aware that many people believe he knew beforehand about the 1990 coup attempt. The same suspicion also attaches to Basdeo Panday who, like Mr Manning, was fortuitously absent from Parliament on that fateful Friday afternoon. Muslimeen leader Abu Bakr, some years ago, claimed that he had tipped off both political leaders — but Bakr is hardly a trustworthy source. Still, Mr Manning’s refusal to even consider an enquiry into the events of 1990 will add fuel to the theories that continue to make the rounds 15 years after the six-day debacle. The persons who embrace these ideas, among them certain media commentators, seem to believe that Bakr was just the puppet of more powerful persons. This is only one reason why an enquiry is necessary.

Mr Manning’s reasons for refusing are extremely thin. He argued, for example, that people’s memories will be hazy. Even if this were so — and Mr Manning can speak with authority only about his own powers of recollection — then obviously those memories will get hazier the longer we wait. He also said that the Government — by which he really meant the PNM — had its views on the circumstances of the coup and the breaches in security which led to it. He did not say, however, what those views were — which is exactly the kind of thing a commission of enquiry would put in the public record. Mr Manning also gave the assurance that the Government would be vigilant about a repeat of the coup attempt. But vigilance in the absence of knowledge is a thin shield.

However, as if to prove the extent of the Government’s intelligence, Mr Manning said, “We are not unaware of a threat to the Prime Minister’s life at this time.” The use of the double negative, the royal “we”, and the third person reference, however, all combine to give an unfortunate impression. The fact is, it has taken 15 years for the PNM to even acknowledge the annual commemoration of the coup attempt. And Mr Manning’s refusal to set up a commission of enquiry suggests that even this small step is mere politicking, rather than a real recognition of the damage done to this country on July 27, 1990. Such recognition is absolutely crucial for coming to terms with the event and weighing the consequences.

A commission of enquiry need not be one intended to lay blame. The specific failures of security and leadership are really incidental. What our society needs is a clear and official record of what happened during those six days. Up to now, for example, many people believe that more than 24 persons were murdered on July 27. The extent of the looting by ordinary citizens, not all of them poor, remains uncalculated. Also forgotten are the Muslimeen’s absurd attempts on radio to claim that hordes of cheering people had come out on the streets in support of their overthrow of the Government.

Many of these questions can be clarified through the print and electronic media records which still exist. Many people can come forward to give eyewitness testimony to various events of the six days. This kind of enquiry will help provide closure with the 1990 coup attempt, and create the only kind of security which can truly prevent a repeat of such an attack — a nation-wide mindset that, having seen all that happened through clear eyes, says “Never again!”