Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton has made it unequivocally clear that neither he nor the PNC-led A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) will be condemning controversial political commentator and Working People’s Alliance (WPA) member Dr. David Hinds for his inflammatory and racially charged statements.
Pressed by reporters at a press conference on Friday about whether his party would distance itself from Hinds’ repeated derogatory comments, Norton dismissed the concerns, saying, “I don’t know about disparaging remarks.”
Hinds, in multiple public appearances, has openly accused the APNU of elevating members based on race. He singled out APNU executive Daniel Seeram, alleging that his rise in the party is owed solely to his Indian ethnicity, asserting that “when you’re an Indian, you rise up quickly in the black party at the expense of some black members.”
He went further to describe Seeram as “an Indian man rewarded by the votes of Africans.”
Hinds has also referred to the party’s former General Secretary, Geeta Chandan-Edmond, as a “slave catcher,” and in 2025, used his platform to label sections of the Afro-Guyanese community as “lick bottoms,” “house slaves,” and “sell-outs.”
Despite the seriousness of these remarks, Norton has once again opted not to denounce Hinds. Instead, the opposition leader chose to defend him, saying, “We engage David Hinds. We believe he’s a very intelligent person […] there is no way we will condemn David.”
Norton added that Hinds has the right to express his views, stating, “When his views conflict, we will have to deal with it.” He went further, noting that Hinds is “conscious” of what he says and that his remarks are “a conscious decision.”
This pattern of silence is not a new phenomenon. In 2023, WPA figure Tacuma Ogunseye sparked national outrage when he suggested that the ruling PPP was using security forces to “execute” Africans and called on Joint Services members to be “battle ready.”
Yet again, Norton downplayed the remarks as merely “a poor choice of words,” refusing to offer clear condemnation and instead defending Ogunseye’s right to free speech.
