The Editor, Sir:

I read Dr. W. Miller-Rowe's letter in The Sunday Gleaner as well as Mickey Haughton-James' comments on the South East St. Ann affair. Reading that letter was like preaching to the converted.

I concur with both Dr. W. Miller-Rowe and Haughton-James that Ms. Hanna's credentials as a competent potential representative of the people of South East St. Ann are sound. She is just as competent as the other potential contenders and in the long run may even prove more competent than them.

Neither her track record in social work nor her commitment to serve is being questioned. Whether or not she is the best representative for South East St. Ann, I cannot say with any degree of certainty. As someone who takes individual rights as basic value (which includes the right to make 'wrong' decisions), I resolutely believe that that should be determined by the people of the South East St. Ann constituency. No one person or group of persons can decide what is right for everybody. This is where both Mickey Haughton-James and Dr. Miller-Rowe missed the boat.

The selection process

The substantive issue is not who is selected to represent the constituency but how that person was elected/selected. What I think most people including myself take issue with is the method of selection and not the candidate selected. I see shades of Hugo Chávez filtering here.

The method of selection was not consistent with the principles of democracy. There would be no issue had the people of South East St. Ann made a choice among the contending candidates.

I am, etc.,

MAURICE W. DRYSDALE

mwdrysdale@hotmail.com

Alexander Park, Lyssons P.O.

St. Thomas

Via Go-Jamaica