Au­thor and ex-jour­nal­ist Raoul Pan­tin, who has ex­pe­ri­enced two states of emer­gency, be­lieves the present one is a nec­es­sary move by the Gov­ern­ment to stop the wan­ton mur­der­ing tak­ing place in T&T.

"I be­lieve the im­me­di­ate im­pact is that it will stop the wan­ton mur­der­ing that is go­ing on," Pan­tin said in an in­ter­view yes­ter­day. He crit­i­cised those who are com­plain­ing about the state of emer­gency.Con­vinced that the law­less­ness be­gan when the 1990 Ja­maat al Mus­limeen in­sur­gents were freed, he said,"You can't have peo­ple run­ning through com­mu­ni­ties shoot­ing peo­ple wily ni­ly and not have the Gov­ern­ment do any­thing about it."Crime is en­dem­ic and the Gov­ern­ment has to take dras­tic ac­tion to put an end to the free for all crim­i­nal ac­tion."

Pan­tin was a jour­nal­ist dur­ing the 1970 Black Pow­er Rev­o­lu­tion which re­sult­ed in a six-month state of emer­gency and a sec­ond one for three months in 1971.He was al­so a hostage at Trinidad & To­ba­go Tele­vi­sion in 1990 when Ja­maat al Mus­limeen in­sur­rec­tion­ists seized the build­ing as part of their at­tempt­ed over­throw of the gov­ern­ment. A state of emer­gency was al­so de­clared that year.

He has writ­ten Black Pow­er Day and Days of Wrath, which chron­i­cles the two events.

To­day, at 68, Pan­tin is liv­ing through his third state of emer­gency.Re­spond­ing to those com­plain­ing about it, he said, "I am not in favour of the sus­pen­sion of Con­sti­tu­tion­al rights."But you al­so have to bear in mind the rea­son why."I wish peo­ple would stop be­ing ig­no­rant. You can't have your cake and eat it too."Peo­ple have been ac­cus­ing the Gov­ern­ment of not do­ing some­thing about the crime sit­u­a­tion and now that it is do­ing some­thing they are com­plain­ing."He said, like in 1990, he was sure peo­ple were fet­ing and hold­ing cur­few par­ties dur­ing the state of emer­gency.

Pan­tin dis­missed al­le­ga­tions that the state of emer­gency is a ploy by the Gov­ern­ment to de­ter the trade union move­ment which has been threat­en­ing to shut down the coun­try. "That is fool­ish­ness," he said.

He saw no sim­i­lar­i­ty be­tween the three states of emer­gency."In 1970 it was to de­tain peo­ple who were protest­ing against the gov­ern­ment. "In 1990 it was de­clared af­ter a vi­o­lent over­throw of the gov­ern­ment.

"The main in­tent of the present state of emer­gency is to go af­ter crim­i­nal el­e­ments."Pan­tin said round­ing up peo­ple on Nel­son Street, how­ev­er, would not solve the crime prob­lem and the Gov­ern­ment needs to go af­ter white col­lar crim­i­nals too."Where are the guns com­ing from? T&T does not man­u­fac­ture guns. Who are bring­ing them in and through what process?" he asked.