Former Deputy Chief of Staff Valerie Sawyerr says she has been left confused by a recent statement from former President Jerry Rawlings suggesting his critics are worried about his integrity.
Dr. Sawyerr questioned the much touted “integrity” of the former president by drawing his attention to a car gift he allegedly received on his 70th birthday.
“Maybe they will explain to you that the luxury car you see in their yard was given to them as a gift by unnamed friends … the same way the black convertible Chevy Coupe sports car was given by unnamed friends as a birthday gift.”
Mr. Rawlings, who has given indication he will respond to Valerie Sawyerr at the “right time,” said the former deputy chief of staff is worried about his integrity.
Speaking with the Daily Post newspaper in an interview, Dr. Sawyerr said she is unsure if she was the target of the former president’s interview to the press.
“Rawlings’ position that I am threatened by his integrity to be true, three premises must be established: a. that he has integrity, b. that I do not have integrity and c. that I am intimidated in any form or manner by the integrity he must first have.”
According to her, Mr. Rawlings could not be talking about her because the “headlines” by reporters and what she heard were different.
“But maybe the headlines have not been fair to him. In the voice clip I listened to, he did not say those who lack integrity feel threatened ‘by those of us who have integrity’. He said those who lack integrity feel threatened ‘by those of us who have the influence of integrity’.
“I am really not sure what he is trying to say,” she told the paper
She also questioned Mr. Rawlings’s own interpretation of what the word “integrity” means to him as a person. She said the word applies to “those perceived as having integrity even though they may not have it; those who can influence others to be persons of integrity even though they themselves may not be persons of integrity; or those who make enough noise about integrity so they are seen as being influential in matters of integrity even if they themselves do not have integrity?”