You are here

Wayne contemplates another hunger strike

Protest against Debe interchange
Published: 
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Leader of the Highway Re-route Movement, Dr Wayne Kublalsingh, reads a copy of the T&T Guardian during his protest outside the Office of the Prime Minister, St Clair, yesterday. PHOTO: KRISTIAN DE SILVA

Environmentalist Dr Wayne Kublalsingh says he intends to begin another hunger strike to stop construction of the Debe to Mon Desir segment of the Solomon Hochoy Highway extension. Speaking at under a small tent opposite the Office of the Prime Minister at Gray Street, St Clair, yesterday, Kublalsingh said he was advised by his doctors of the risk of irreparable medical complications given the impact of the 21-day hunger strike in @012 had on his body.

“I think this is an important issue that is worth dying for. I have no qualms about doing that.” As he sat reading newspapers in the make-shift curbside office which he has occupied for the past six months, Kublalsingh said his action was a last resort as the Highway Re-route Movement (HRM)’s previous attempts to convince government to review their position on the project had failed. 

“I can not see any other option. What else the public expects us to do we have done demonstrations, a hunger strike, diplomacy, prayers and we have gone through the courts. The government is not obeying a process.” Kublalsingh claimed the group decided to intensify its efforts after it learnt construction on the Penal interchange begun last week. The group is expected to hold a press conference, this morning, at another make-shift camp near the construction site.

“We cant allow that. Its intolerable. If they complete that interchange it means the highway is finished.” Although he acknowledged the group had failed in its two attempts before High Court and the Court of Appeal to obtain an interim injunction against the government, Kublalsingh seemed hopeful of a favourable outcome in their final appeal in London, England.

“All the rulings so far, they contradict each other on key issues. It is not that we are imputing improper motives but that is how the judicial system operates and that is why we have taken it to the Privy Council.”

Disclaimer

User comments posted on this website are the sole views and opinions of the comment writer and are not representative of Guardian Media Limited or its staff.

Guardian Media Limited accepts no liability and will not be held accountable for user comments.

Guardian Media Limited reserves the right to remove, to edit or to censor any comments.

Any content which is considered unsuitable, unlawful or offensive, includes personal details, advertises or promotes products, services or websites or repeats previous comments will be removed.

Before posting, please refer to the Community Standards, Terms and conditions and Privacy Policy