Dear Editor,
In one of his latest opinion pieces, GHK Lall calls for “foreign experts” to examine President Dr. Irfaan Ali’s assets in light of corruption allegations made by Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed concerning the President’s farm.
If that is the standard GHK Lall wishes to promote, then it should be applied consistently.
What about the individual making the accusations? Azruddin Mohamed and his father have been using every available legal avenue to avoid being held criminally accountable in the United States, where they have been indicted following investigations conducted by the very kind of “foreign experts” Mr. Lall now appears eager to invoke. Yet there has been no comparable call from GHK Lall for the Mohameds to submit themselves to the judicial process or to cease employing repeated legal tactics aimed at delaying extradition.
The inconsistency is difficult to ignore.
Why is GHK Lall unwilling to apply the same standard to Azruddin Mohamed that he seeks to apply to the President? As the holder of the constitutional office of Opposition Leader, Mr. Mohamed presents himself as an alternative national leader. That office carries with it an expectation of accountability and transparency.
Azruddin Mohamed has been sanctioned by the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and indicted by a federal grand jury in Miami on 11 counts, including allegations of money laundering, wire fraud, and mail fraud. Those charges stem from an investigation conducted by U.S. law enforcement authorities—the same “foreign experts” Mr. Lall appears to place such confidence in when it suits his argument.
If foreign scrutiny is to be accepted as the benchmark, then it cannot be selectively embraced only when politically convenient.
Principles mean little if they are applied to one individual while another is shielded from the very same level of examination.
Yours faithfully,
Cedric Lord.