Opposition criticises radar removal, selective TATT enforcement

DA­REECE PO­LO

Se­nior Re­porter

da­reece.po­[email protected]

The Op­po­si­tion is con­tin­u­ing to press the gov­ern­ment over what it de­scribes as unan­swered ques­tions sur­round­ing the in­stal­la­tion and sud­den re­moval of a Unit­ed States mil­i­tary radar sys­tem re­port­ed­ly used for sur­veil­lance across Trinidad and To­ba­go.

Speak­ing on the mat­ter, PNM chair­man Mar­vin Gon­za­les re­called that the Prime Min­is­ter ini­tial­ly said the radar was de­ployed to as­sist lo­cal law en­force­ment in com­bat­ing crime and nar­co-traf­fick­ing.

He not­ed that the De­fence Min­is­ter lat­er in­di­cat­ed the sys­tem would re­main in­def­i­nite­ly as part of ef­forts to ad­dress drug and hu­man traf­fick­ing.

Gon­za­les al­so ref­er­enced ear­li­er state­ments that US per­son­nel would as­sist with in­fra­struc­ture work and that the radar had con­tributed to a $171 mil­lion drug seizure at the Ca­roni Swamp in De­cem­ber.

How­ev­er, with­in weeks the radar was re­moved and US per­son­nel with­drew, prompt­ing fresh con­cerns about the true pur­pose of the de­ploy­ment.

“Is it that we no longer have the is­sue of drug traf­fick­ing and nar­co-traf­fick­ing in Trinidad and To­ba­go? Is it that our bor­ders are no longer porous? Have all these is­sues now been oblit­er­at­ed, so that there is no need for a radar if, ac­cord­ing to the Prime Min­is­ter, it was de­ployed to fight these crim­i­nal scourges?” Gon­za­les asked.

“We are not fools, and we are not go­ing to di­gest the dai­ly di­et of lies fed to us by the Prime Min­is­ter and her min­is­ters,” he added.

He ar­gued that the re­moval of the radar and the de­par­ture of US per­son­nel re­in­forced the op­po­si­tion’s view that the sys­tem may have served a dif­fer­ent, undis­closed pur­pose.

The PNM chair­man al­so crit­i­cised a let­ter is­sued by the Telecom­mu­ni­ca­tions Au­thor­i­ty of Trinidad and To­ba­go (TATT) to CNC3 News fol­low­ing the broad­cast of re­marks by for­mer Prime Min­is­ter Dr Kei­th Row­ley, in which he re­ferred to the Prime Min­is­ter as a “jamette.”

Gon­za­les ac­cused the reg­u­la­tor of se­lec­tive en­force­ment, ar­gu­ing that it failed to act when deroga­to­ry state­ments were made against mem­bers of the PNM.

“Where was TATT when we were called pae­dophiles by the Prime Min­is­ter? Where was TATT when in­de­pen­dent sen­a­tors were de­scribed as bootlick­ers and low-lev­el PNM func­tionar­ies? Where was TATT when the Prime Min­is­ter threat­ened to ‘cuff down’ the Mem­ber for Diego Mar­tin North East? Where was TATT when she tar­get­ed our col­league from Port of Spain North/St Ann’s West, telling the Op­po­si­tion Leader to ‘go and ask your small pin lawyer’? Where was TATT when mem­bers of the PNM lead­er­ship were pub­licly ac­cused of in­volve­ment in nar­co-traf­fick­ing and us­ing drug pro­ceeds to con­struct Bal­isi­er House?” Gon­za­les asked.

He de­scribed the let­ter as part of a broad­er at­tempt to un­der­mine de­mo­c­ra­t­ic free­doms.

Tear­ing up the doc­u­ment, Gon­za­les added that while the op­po­si­tion was not seek­ing to de­fend any par­tic­u­lar me­dia house, it would con­tin­ue to ad­vo­cate for fair­ness and ac­count­abil­i­ty in the pub­lic do­main.