Will justice be had for vaccines blunder?

DR ERROL N BENJAMIN

SHOULD justice be meted out to the public officials responsible for the colossal blunder of June 9-11 which wreaked havoc on the lives of our citizens, especially the elderly?

Macbeth in that great Shakespearean play of the same name speaks of a kind of “even-handed justice” which “commends th’ ingredience of our poison’d chalice/To our own lips” (Act I scene vii 9-10). This is in sync with the biblical tenet of “whatsoever a man soweth that shall he reap” and equally so with the idea of karmic justice in Hinduism, not forgetting our own local parlance of “what goes around comes around.”

These ideas point to an unrelenting justice in the scheme of things which dispenses justice with an even hand, yours being what you deserve.

I speak of this all-embracing justice, retributive/poetic justice if you will, in its philosophical sense, because it seems our only hope in a mode of local politics which does not allow for any kind of justice in the here and now due to ethnically minded supporters and others with partisan interests for whom their leaders can do no wrong and, therefore, not held accountable. But should this lot not be made to answer and made to pay, if necessary?

Macbeth hesitates in killing the king because he is aware that you simply can’t “trammel up the consequence” of his assassination because of this “even-handed justice,” which ensures reciprocal consequence to your actions. Can we not apply the same principle in the here and now to those culpable for the fiasco of June 9-11?

For admitting in hindsight that they did not have enough vaccines to embark on a universal vaccination drive, attempting too much with too little, yet going ahead nevertheless with such devastating affect, is a crime beyond measure against a people who elected them to office.

Saying sorry is of some worth in the domain of personal relationships but is it enough for those who trusted the politicians to lead them through thick and thin? Surely the people would not want blood for the mistakes that their leaders make from time to time but the debacle of June 9-11 betrays a level of indifference to the public’s well-being that is unimaginable.

“Indifference” suggests a deliberate kind of malice but I would spare these officials such an insinuation. Instead I would ask: Is the level of their incompetence so far-reaching as not to know or anticipate the kinds of problems of those three fateful days? Or on the same continuum, is their contempt for public reaction so total that they saw absolutely no need for a critical analysis of the plan of action to determine the possible negative impact upon the people?

But if there is any credibility to the above one can understand why. Seasoned as they are in the predictable ethnic response of their infallibility, politicians know that they can do and say as they please without question and not having to account. And even for those not so simple minded who can ask a question or two, nestling in the arms of officialdom enjoying the perks thereof, is a self-serving priority more worthwhile than the public good?

Which is why we must take the apologies given for this colossal blunder with a pinch of salt, the first telling in its contradiction, coming from a source where such language is unfamiliar territory merely intended to save face and save the skin. And the other, a mockery of a true apology, taking the blame as a way of closing the door on all accountability, saving the perpetrators from having to answer (editorial, Sunday Express, June 13).

A democracy cannot thrive where unacceptable political behaviour carries no consequence. You are either voted out at the national level or replaced at the party level with new blood with new thinking all for the good. Sadly, our ethnic orientation in the politics negates the first and at the party level unquestioning loyalty trumps any dissent.

The continuing effect is for politicians to make decisions for the people, whether it hurts them or not, with little concern for their reaction, as with the intensification of the lockdowns with little care of balancing in reality, “life and livelihood,” despite all the claims to that effect.

Will that political syndrome ever end? Maybe we will have to think of the kind of divine justice which Macbeth spoke about earlier, but what of the free will to chart our own course with which we have been endowed?

As usual I leave the answer to you.