Has Trinidad and Tobago learnt any lessons from July 27, 1990?

TREVOR SUDAMA

Guest column

THE unprecedented violent assault on the Parliament while in session on the afternoon of Friday, July 27, 1990 and the simultaneous brutal attack on state-owned TTT constituted the most overwhelmingly traumatic and demoralising event in the country’s short history since Independence. Its impact is still being felt 34 years later.

As a hostage myself, together with others who were in the Red House's Parliament chamber, it was an unforgettably harrowing experience of fear, trepidation, mayhem, confusion and helplessness.

I suffered being grazed by a bullet to the heel of my left foot. There is a tiny piece of shrapnel still embedded in my foot which is a constant reminder of the brutality of that occasion.

I am probably the only hostage who subsequently published, in a series of columns in the press, a brief account of my observations of what transpired during the ensuing five days of captivity.

Today, that fateful event seems to be a fading memory, with little interest among the general population, in an assessment of the enormity of the attempt to overthrow a democratically-elected government through a brazen and brutal exercise of force.

A commission of inquiry was held to investigate the circumstances which led to the attempted coup, to identify those responsible, to detail the activities during its duration and the consequences which followed.

It is of note that the leader of the insurrection – now dead – refused to testify at the enquiry and no sanction could be enforced.

The commission was also mandated to make recommendations. I am not aware if any of these were either accepted or implemented by government, particularly the one which proposed compensation for the victims and/or their families.

There has not been any discernible query or concern from the public.

The general reaction reflects not only a lack of appreciation of history and a hugely significant historical event in TT, but an indifference to a robust commitment to the preservation and protection of democratic institutions and processes.

When a judge declared that the amnesty document signed by the majority of hostages in Parliament was valid, though executed under duress, and that the immunity from prosecution of the insurrectionists was enforceable, there was no hue and cry from the population about this miscarriage of justice, and freedom from sanction granted to wrongdoers.

The Jamaat al Muslimeen was even awarded compensation for damage to their property at Mucurapo Road.

In an earlier event, there was also no expression of dismay and outrage when, during the Black Power uprising of 1970, a group of disaffected soldiers at Teteron Barracks revolted against the army command and sought to travel to Port of Spain to show solidarity with the protesters who were marching against the government of the day.

There were freed on a technicality from facing the consequences of their mutinous behaviour.

In the current imbroglio, with respect to the operations of the Strategic Services Agency (SSA), which is a major component in the security apparatus of the State, serious allegations of conspiracies to overthrow the government are being made.

The population, however, is not demanding direct and validated answers from the powers that be over the vulnerability of the State to subversion and capture, and whether the alleged perpetrators are being subject to the full force of the law.

If the State is in considerable peril and the perpetrators are free from sanction, the population, by its silence, seems blissfully unconcerned.

It has been said that the price of freedom and democracy is eternal vigilance.

It is an open question whether a review or analysis of the insurrection on July 27, 1990 has generated any degree of vigilance in our society and among those in authority charged with dealing with any serious emerging threats to the State.

Editor's Note:
Trevor Sudama is a former MP and government minister.