The Tribune

TRIBUNE readers have criticised the move to block coverage of the Cuban detainee abuse hearings, claiming it gives the impression there is something to hide.

‘TalRussell’, a user-name often selected by a fervent government supporter, wrote on tribune242.com: “I must side with The Tribune because my concern as a Bahamalander is why PM Christie wants to block the public’s need for sunlight on the Cuban abuse ‘allegations’, wherever the truth leads us as a nation.

“Too disturbing of a pattern when blocking The Tribune from attending the hearings follows on the heels of a minister of Her Majesty’s Crown having recently vacated serious criminal charges against an accused, while stating that he was acting in the best interests of Bahamaland’s National Security.

“What section of Bahamaland’s National Security Act gives this PM and one of his ministers such power?”

Later, ‘TalRussell’ added: “The Tribune’s right to report has nothing at all to do with guilt or innocence but making damn sure the government of the day is operating in the sunlight. Most Bahamalander’s ain’t going buy the government’s case that this is to protect the nation’s National Security – protect what, from which enemy of the state?

‘blackcat23’ added: “Of course they’ll deny The Tribune – we can’t have all our dirty little secrets out for the public to see! After all the flip-flopping and back and forth from Fred (Mitchell) and the rest of the PLP, all the drama this has caused both locally and in the US, you’d think we could do better as a country.

“We will have a hearing, oh yes, but will only provide you with what you need to know. Never mind thinking for yourselves as individuals and drawing your own conclusions.

“As if this case wasn’t suspicious enough, as if it wasn’t already so poorly handled – let’s just make it even more shady.

“No party is perfect, but if the government had come out from day one and said that we would prosecute any offenders of the law should something come out of the investigation, we would be in a different position today.

“In the long run, wouldn’t it look better and be more ethically sound to admit to a fault of a few, punish them publicly so the world can see and then move on? All these cover-ups are only drawing more negative attention to the Bahamas and creating more problems.”

According to ‘henny23’, the government is “afraid of what the press may print. With appointing their own choice to attend, they can confer with them as to what should/should not be reported to the public. They are so afraid of being exposed to the world and they know they are definitely wrong. So continue to sweep it under the rug as much as possible.”

But ‘getrightbahamas’ asked: “Someone tell me where in the world is the media allowed in military hearings? Especially where its a national security and diplomatic matter?”

‘banker’ countered by pointing out: “It’s not a military hearing, and it isn’t a national security matter. It is a human rights violation matter, and a contravention of the Geneva conventions that the Bahamas is signatory to.”