The Green Mask Slips

/0 Comments/in , /by

THE 592 GUARDIANEDITORIAL · INVESTIGATIVE ANALYSIS

The Green Mask Slips: Guyana’s 2026 Environmental Performance Index Score Exposes the Gap Between Biodiversity Branding and Climate Reality

While the Ali administration markets Guyana abroad as a biodiversity partner and low-carbon development model, Yale’s 2026 Environmental Performance Index ranks the country dead last of 177 nations on climate change mitigation — the single steepest ten-year decline in the entire index.
Guyana ranks 151st of 177 countries in the 2026 Environmental Performance Index (EPI), published by the Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy in partnership with Columbia University — a score of 30.32, nearly 12 points below the Latin America & Caribbean regional average of 42.07, and 30th of 31 countries in the region. The figure has circulated widely in recent days, framed as proof that Guyana now trails even Haiti in environmental standing. That comparison is true on its face. But it is also the least interesting fact in the dataset.

The real story is not the overall rank. It is what sits beneath it: a country that performs credibly on the metrics tied to its standing forest, and catastrophically on the metrics tied to its oil economy. Those two facts sitting side by side, in the same government’s official messaging, in the same fiscal year, are the actual scandal — and they are Yale’s numbers, not ours.

The Number the Government Won’t Be Citing

Buried inside Guyana’s aggregate score is a single category result that deserves to be the headline: Guyana ranks 177th of 177 countries — dead last, full stop — on Climate Change Mitigation, the policy objective that measures a country’s trajectory on greenhouse gas emissions. Guyana’s score in that category is 3.67. Its ten-year change is -20.77, the steepest decline recorded for any country in the 2026 index — worse than Mongolia, worse than Laos, worse than any of the traditional laggards this ranking usually surfaces.
A related indicator, greenhouse gas emissions trend adjusted per capita, tells the same story from a different angle: Guyana scores 0.0, tied for the worst rank in the world (171st of 177), with a ten-year swing of -18.25. This is not a measure of how much a country emits in absolute terms — small, low-population states are structurally protected from that comparison. It is a measure of trajectory: whether a country’s per-capita emissions, adjusted for economic growth, are rising or falling. Guyana’s are rising faster, relative to its own growth, than almost anywhere else measured.

Forests: 36th of 177. Climate Change Mitigation: 177th of 177. Same country, same year, same government.

That divergence is the anomaly this report should be built around — not Guyana-versus-Haiti, but Guyana-versus-Guyana. On Forests, the country ranks a respectable 36th of 177, a score of 30.42 that reflects the genuinely low deforestation rate and the intact landscape integrity that has anchored every LCDS and carbon-credit pitch this government has made since 2009. The rainforest claim is not manufactured.

What is manufactured is the impression, cultivated in international forums and glossy biodiversity-partnership announcements, that this forest performance describes the country’s environmental trajectory as a whole. It does not. It describes one category out of twelve — and it is being used to paper over the worst-performing category in the entire index.

Reading the Category Breakdown

The table below sets out where Guyana’s 2026 EPI performance actually sits, category by category, against the field of 177 countries scored under this edition’s methodology (47 indicators across 12 issue categories, spanning three policy objectives: Environmental Health, Ecosystem Vitality, and Climate Change).

Category Guyana Rank Score 10-Yr Change
Overall EPI 151 / 177 30.32 -4.13
Climate Change Mitigation 177 / 177 3.67 -20.77
GHG Emissions Trend (per capita, adj. 171 / 177 0.0 -18.25
Forests 36 / 177 30.42 n/a

Source: Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy / Columbia University, 2026 Environmental Performance Index, epi.yale.edu. Regional average (Latin America & Caribbean): 42.07.

The pattern is unambiguous. Guyana’s ecosystem assets — the forest it did not build, only declined to destroy — are propping up an aggregate score that would otherwise sit even lower. Strip Forests out of the picture and weigh Guyana purely on the categories shaped by government policy choice — energy procurement, emissions trajectory, industrial permitting — and the picture is one of the worst-performing petrostates measured anywhere in the 177-country field.

The Con: Selling Biodiversity While Failing Climate

This publication has tracked, across the Wales Gas-to-Energy project, the Karpowership rate escalation from 7.06¢ to 9.5¢ per kWh, and the broader energy dependency thread, a pattern of procurement decisions that entrench fossil generation rather than displace it.

The 2026 EPI’s Climate Change Mitigation collapse is the statistical signature of exactly that pattern.

A country cannot credibly market itself as a biodiversity and low-carbon partner to sovereign wealth funds and COP delegations while its own emissions trajectory — independently measured, methodologically transparent, published by one of the most cited environmental research institutions in the world — is rated the single worst of any nation on earth.

The Long Creek estate controversy, the Former Presidents Benefits Bill, and the GPL-InterEnergy sole-source contract are, on their face, governance stories about land, money, and procurement law. The EPI data gives them an environmental dimension that has been largely absent from the public conversation: every one of those threads sits downstream of the same executive posture — extraction and consumption decisions made with minimal independent oversight, dressed in the language of climate leadership abroad.

What This Is Not

Fairness requires two caveats, both of which strengthen rather than weaken the case.    First, Yale’s own FAQ states plainly that EPI scores should not be compared across editions as a time series, because methodology and indicator counts change with each release — the 2026 edition uses 47 indicators across 12 categories and 177 countries, versus 58 indicators, 11 categories, and 180 countries in 2024. Any claim that Guyana has “fallen” some number of places since the last edition is not supportable from this data and should not appear in this publication’s coverage. The story is not a decline narrative. It is a snapshot — and the snapshot alone is damning enough.
Second, the Forests and land-use performance is real and should be stated as such without qualification. The case here is not that Guyana’s environmental record is uniformly poor. It is that the government’s public messaging leans entirely on the one category where performance is strong, while remaining silent on the category — climate mitigation — where performance is, by Yale’s own numbers, the worst measured anywhere in the world.

The Accountability Question

Every biodiversity partnership announcement, every ART TREES carbon-credit sale, every appearance at an international climate forum trades on the credibility of Guyana’s forest numbers. None of that messaging, to date, has had to answer for the 177th-place climate mitigation score sitting in the same index. That is the question this newsroom will be putting to the relevant ministries: how does a government reconcile marketing itself as a global biodiversity and climate partner while its own independently measured emissions trajectory is rated worst in class among 177 nations?

Guyanese taxpayers, and the international partners being asked to fund and endorse these biodiversity arrangements, deserve an answer grounded in the same data the government cites when the numbers run in its favour.
THE 592 GUARDIAN ACCOUNTABILITY INTEGRITY IN JOURNALISM. GUYANA

Pres Ali’s Heaven’s Gate -the Penultimate Chapter (IX)

/0 Comments/in /by

THE 592 GUARDIAN♦ ACCOUNTABILITY JOURNALISM FOR GUYANA 

Pres Ali’s Heaven’s Gate -the Penultimate Chapter (IX)

OPINION. ♦ BY GHK. LALL 

Pres Ali has started.  Landgate.  Sheepgate.  Heaven’s Gate.  At the well-named Long Creek.  It’s a long story.  Having started, Pres Ali must continue.  Articulate more.  Represent more.  So that the air is sanitized.  So, that he himself emerges with distinction against the allegations laid next to his name.  I am with him.  But only insofar as he is committed to deal comprehensively with the Guyanese people.  Consider what follows.  Unemotionally.  Honestly.

It does not look well when a regular citizen is seeking a tiny slice of land to build a small homestead has to wait.  Count the days.  Mark his or her calendar.  For years.  But, in contrast, for their national leader, then a minister, to be associated with lands that are 200, 300, maybe as much as 500 times larger.  Bigger than what little people ask for to start a home for their small families.  A minister should not come in front of a villager, a renter, not even a lowly beggar.  His wait should not be shorter.  Not smoother.  I respectfully lay these considerations before Excellences Ali, Jagdeo, Nandlall.  Laws not men.  Processes not princes.  Consistent standards not seemingly schemes agitating to the peace.

For what is a minister that makes a great pole-vault forward?  A head of state.  He is now more than an oil head.  More than a hemispheric gas master.  More than a church minister or the president of a community committee. 

He is the president of the most-watched, most-talked about, most magnetic Oil Republic on the planet.  Therefore, it is in Pres Ali’s best interests to stand and deliver.  Landgate should not peter out in the manner of Vice-Gate.  The presidency is too sacrosanct a concept.  Too inviolable.  Even to be visited by the most delicate, most fleeting, fingernail’s touch.  That sullies its aura, its halo, its corona.  This is my free consultation for my president’s benefit.

What he has presented amounts to the equivalent of a dollop from State media, friendly media, and the PPP-owned and directed Live in Guyana guerilla media.  Depth questioned.  Credibility untested.  Connecting ingredients unknown.  A matter of this seriousness needs more substance. 

  A development that oozes profuse sprawling grandeur calls for more than the president being his own policeman.  He can’t be.  Shouldn’t work that route.  Not have anything to do with such an approach.

His people will tell him what he wants to hear, what feathers their beds.  I tell him, as is.  On the president’s head now rests a world of the untoward.  Not becoming.  Definitely diluting of the standing that ought to be automatically associated with the presidency of this Republic. .

Now storied.  Now still ravaged, savaged, and hollowed out.  Naked before the world, stands Guyana.  How could the U.S. ambassador, or any High Commissioner, speak with authority about democracy and purity of any kind in Guyana?

How can even a mere commoner do so? Considering the still unended, still fully unaddressed, still nakedly undressed development at Long Creek?  In passing, I note that the lot number of this state within a state is related to one of the Burnham names.  Many sharp blows have been aimed at his name.  Time will provide the record of what’s said, done, now about this glorious (or gross) development.  What now transcends this land, as Guyana’s premier protected nature reserve.

These considerations I place at the feet of Excellency Ali, my president.  Heroic to many. Avoid transforming that into a horror for more.  Much trust hangs in the balance.  The air is unsettled.  Much benefit extended.  Maybe I overextended.  Let none of that go to waste, Excellency.  Mr. Mohamed, a political opponent, has spoken.  For himself.  For probably 110,000 Guyanese.  Likely others.                                                                                                        I speak for none, other than every landless, foodless, spiritless, hopeless citizen of Guyana. 

I trust that there’s no Guyanese so crass as to deny me that momentary indulgence.  My best to Pres Ali.

THE STABROEK SURRENDER

/0 Comments/in , /by

THE 592 GUARDIAN ♦ Independent Accountability Journalism  ·  Guyana

EDITORIAL

THE STABROEK SURRENDER

Part IV of IV  ·  Pollute As Much As You Want

Pollute As Much As You Want, Provided You Can Pay For It

Guyana was promised zero flaring at the Stabroek Block. Instead, ExxonMobil has burned off more than a billion cubic feet of gas into the Atlantic sky, paid a fraction of what independent analysts say the pollution is worth, and won in court when Guyanese citizens tried to force a stricter permit. This is the enforcement gap at the heart of Guyana’s oil era — and the final installment of this series.

Parts I through III of this series traced the arithmetic of the 2016 Production Sharing Agreement (PSA), the stability clause that froze that arithmetic beyond Parliament’s reach, and the decommissioning liability Guyana is quietly pre-funding with no guarantee the money will still exist when it is needed. Part IV closes the series by asking a simpler question: when the Contractor breaks its own environmental promises, what actually happens?

The answer, on the public record, is: not very much

The Promise: Zero Flaring

When the Government of Guyana approved the environmental permit for the Liza Phase 1 project, it did so on the strength of a specific commitment. ExxonMobil’s own environmental impact assessment represented that the project could achieve zero non-routine gas flaring — that associated gas produced alongside crude oil would be captured and reinjected into the wells rather than burned off into the atmosphere. The Minister of Natural Resources at the time stated unequivocally that under no circumstances would there be flaring of the gas.

“That promise did not survive first production. Faulty compression equipment aboard the Liza Destiny FPSO caused ExxonMobil to begin flaring within weeks of the field coming online in December 2019, and it has continued in one form or another ever since.”

What the Satellite Data Shows

Independent verification, rather than company self-reporting, has driven most of what the public knows about the scale of the problem. Satellite monitoring compiled through the Every Last Drop project using SkyTruth data, cross-referenced with figures from the environmental rights organization Arayara Institute, documented 1,298 separate flaring events at the Stabroek Block between 2019 and 2023 alone, releasing an estimated à 1.32 million tons of CO2 — comparable to the annual emissions of roughly 287,000 cars. The analysis found the block’s flaring had made Guyana the second-largest gas-flaring emitter in the entire Amazon basin, trailing only Ecuador.

By July 2021, the Government’s own figures put cumulative flared gas at more than 15.1 billion cubic feet. That volume represents energy roughly equivalent to Guyana’s entire national electricity consumption for a year, burned into the sky rather than captured.

The Permit Was Weakened, Not Enforced

The regulatory response to this pattern was not tightening. It was loosening. In April 2021, environmental activists including Sherlina Nageer, using satellite evidence they had gathered independently, formally alerted the Guyana Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to the scale of ongoing flaring. Within a month of that complaint, the EPA revised ExxonMobil’s environmental permit — not to strengthen the zero-flaring requirement, but to extend the allowable flaring period from three consecutive days to sixty.

– The Permit Modification (as reported by multiple independent outlets)

 

Following a 2021 activist complaint documenting extensive non-routine flaring, the EPA revised EEPGL’s environmental permit to extend the allowable continuous flaring window from three days to sixty days, without conducting a fresh Environmental Impact Assessment.

Citizens challenged the legality of that modification in court, arguing that a permit change of this magnitude, made without a new environmental impact review, was unlawful. In 2023, Chief Justice Roxanne George ruled in ExxonMobil’s favour, finding that it had not been proven the modified permit was causing additional adverse environmental effects, and that nothing in Guyanese law prevented the issuance of a modified permit on those terms.

“The government is basically saying: pollute as much as you want, provided you can pay for it.”

That assessment came from Dr. Vincent Adams, the former Head of Guyana’s Environmental Protection Agency and a thirty-year veteran of the US Department of Energy, responding to the court’s ruling. Dr. Adams has been a recurring, credible critic of the regulatory posture Guyana’s institutions have taken toward ExxonMobil throughout this series’ reporting, and his assessment of the flaring permit fits the broader pattern: technically lawful concessions, made in response to the Contractor’s operational failures, that leave the public paying the environmental cost while the Contractor pays a fee calibrated well below the damage.

The Fines Do Not Match the Harm

Guyana calculates flaring penalties under the Polluter Pays Principle set out in its 1996 Environmental Protection Act. The rate has increased over time — from US$30 per tonne of CO2-equivalent under the original permit, to US$45, and now to US$50 under the renewed five-year Liza 1 permit issued in 2025. By late 2021, the EPA confirmed it had collected approximately G$930 million, or roughly US$4.5 million, in cumulative flaring payments from ExxonMobil.

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) found that figure hard to square with the scale of the pollution. Using a benchmark rate of US$75 per tonne — a level IEEFA characterized as more realistic — the organization calculated ExxonMobil should have paid closer to US$26 million for the flaring recorded through mid-2021: roughly six times what it had actually paid. ExxonMobil separately paid an US$8.4 million penalty in 2022, a sum that registers as a rounding error against a company that recorded tens of billions of dollars in global annual profit in the same period.

For comparison, when ExxonMobil flared gas on American soil, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Justice fined the company US$2.5 million in 2017 and required a further US$300 million outlay for pollution-control technology at its domestic facilities. Guyana’s cumulative flaring collections, spread across years and multiple incidents, remain a fraction of what US regulators extracted for a single enforcement action.

A Pattern Consistent With the Rest of the Series

Read against Parts I through III, the flaring record is not an isolated environmental footnote. It is the same structural imbalance this series has documented in the fiscal terms, the stability clause, and the decommissioning liability, now visible in environmental enforcement:

A Contractor whose commitments were not met, a regulator whose response was to relax the rule rather than enforce it, a judiciary that found the relaxation lawful, and a public that bears the atmospheric and reputational cost while the financial penalty remains, by independent estimate, a fraction of the damage.

The scale of what is now at stake is only growing. Stabroek Block output surpassed 918,000 barrels per day in February 2026, with the consortium targeting 1.7 million barrels per day by 2030 and ExxonMobil now seeking environmental authorization for a further 35-well exploration campaign running through 2033. Guyana’s environmental regulator has, for the first time, requested a cumulative impact study covering that new campaign alongside all other offshore activity — a modest but real acknowledgment that project-by-project review has not been sufficient. Whether that acknowledgment translates into enforcement, rather than another accommodation, is the question this series leaves the public, and the Government, to answer.

What The 592 Guardian Is Asking

In concluding this series, we are putting the following questions on the public record, to the Environmental Protection Agency, the Ministry of Natural Resources, and the Department of Energy:

  1. What is the current cumulative total, in both Guyana dollars and US dollars, that ExxonMobil and its partners have paid in flaring penalties since December 2019, broken down by year and incident?
  2. What analysis, if any, did the EPA conduct before extending the permitted continuous flaring window from three days to sixty days in 2021, and will that analysis be published?
  3. Does the Government consider the current US$50-per-tonne flaring penalty rate to reflect the actual environmental and climate cost of the emissions, and if not, what rate would it consider adequate?
  4. In light of the cumulative impact study now being requested for the proposed 35-well exploration campaign, will the EPA apply the same cumulative standard retroactively to the flaring record of the currently producing FPSOs?

We extend the Government and the Contractor an open invitation to respond in full; any response received will be published without alteration alongside this editorial.

This concludes The Stabroek Surrender. Across four parts, this series has examined the fiscal terms, the stability clause that locked them in place, the decommissioning liability Guyana is pre-funding without safeguard, and the flaring record that has outpaced enforcement. ,The throughline is consistent: a Government that entered a defining national contract from a position of weakness, and has since treated every mechanism for correcting that weakness — renegotiation, arbitration exposure, financial safeguards, environmental enforcement — as a fixed cost of doing business rather than a lever available to a sovereign state. The 592Guardian will continue reporting on the audit void and the question of government complicity in a future series.

— The Board, The 592 Guardian

“Water Contamination 630× Above Safety Threshold; GWI Statement Draws Outrage”

/0 Comments/in , , /by

“Water Contamination 630× Above Safety Threshold; GWI Statement Draws Outrage”

OP-ED BY DR.VINCENT ADAMS

Laboratory analysis confirms contaminant concentrations in local water supplies at 630 times the safe regulatory limit, a finding that public health experts say makes Guyana Water Inc.’s recent statement appear irresponsible and dangerously dismissive.

Upon reading the July 5, 2026 edition of THE 592 GUARDIAN summarizing the Public Utilities Commission’s (PUC) 2025 findings on drinking water quality in Regions 4, 7 and 10, I was embarrassed and astounded by the Guyana Water Inc’s (GWI) statement reported in the July 3, 2026 Kaieteur News article that “Water quality issues flagged by PUC affect only taste, colour and appearance, not safety”.

True to the Govt’s code of conduct, GWI attempts to deceive the people, not only by leaving out the actual measurements that would make it impossible to back up their ludicrous claim, but also insultingly tells the people not to believe the coffee coloured water they see with their own eyes. This GWI statement is nothing but irresponsible, callous and dangerous to the people’s health.

This issue is close to home for yours truly, since I happen to be one of the 11 Engineers specially trained by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) to establish and run the GWI (originally GUYWA) initiated in 1972; so, knows first-hand of the world class Water Authority handed over to the PPPC Govt in 1992, only to see it descend to this abbys of incompetence and neglect of its sacred mandate to provide reliable, clean and safe water to the public. Instead, the people are heartlessly advised that it is no big deal for them to drink water that is perilous to their health, while certainly not the same water consumed by Govt officials and their families.

In a normal country, it would have been an oxymoron for a country to be dubbed “the land of many waters” with “water, water everywhere but not a drop to drink” (Poet Samuel Coleridge).

The data analyses and facts – Human beings can survive without oil, electricity, etc., but never without water! A safe water supply is guided by scientifically developed safe standards and undoubtedly the most essential substance for the sustenance of human life. Consequently, let’s address the three contaminants highlighted by the PUC that falls out of the range of safe standards. They are: pH, turbidity and iron.

pH – The pH scale ranges from 0 to 14 with lower pH values corresponding to higher acidity. However, it is most important to note that the pH scale is logarithmic and not linear, meaning each unit change represents a 10-fold change in acidity. For example, a pH of 4 is 10 times more acidic than a pH of 5, and 100 times more acidic than a pH of 6. This means that the 3.7 pH measured at Linden is 630 times more acidic than the World Health Organization (WHO) safe pH limit of 6.5.

Highly acidic water at 630 times the safe limit is corrosive and can dissolve toxic heavy metals such the copper and lead from the plumbing lines, which wind up in your drinking water. Ingesting these metals can cause serious health problems such as cancer, stroke, kidney disease, memory loss, high blood pressure, reduced bone density, etc. It is more toxic for children, as their growing bodies absorb these metals much quicker. Further, water with a high acidity has likely not gone through proper filtration and may still contain pollutants like pesticides and chemicals making the water unsafe to drink.

Turbidity – As clearly defined by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) “Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of water, and the higher the levels the more particles (which carry the pollutants) are present. It is used to indicate water quality and filtration effectiveness (such as whether disease-causing organisms are present) and higher levels are associated with higher levels of disease-causing microorganisms such as viruses, parasites and some bacteria.”

Notwithstanding that one doesn’t need a measurement to verify the obvious that coffee coloured water at Grove means extremely high turbidity, the actual measurement of 29 times the US EPA and WHO limits plainly points out the grave health risk of consuming such water that may indicate presence of disease-causing microorganisms such as viruses, parasites and some bacteria. Substantively, owing to constant flooding, flood water with disease-causing microorganisms from latrines, septic tanks, manholes and pipes transporting raw city sewage, will most likely leak into the drinking water pipe network; thus, testing for the presence of these microorganisms must be conducted, especially during and after floods.

Iron – Though at a high level of 3.35 mg/l, or 11 times the WHO guideline, high iron content is not a major health concern, and high levels are expected from the upper of the two major aquifers supplying Georgetown and the East Coast of Demerara. However, high iron levels may create operational and cosmetic problems, staining plumbing fixtures, sinks, dishes, and laundry with a rust color; and can build up inside pipes, reducing water flow and clogging appliances like dishwashers and water heaters.

Considering the above, is the nation led to believe that the Guyana EPA and GWI has become devoid of technically qualified professionals to advise against such statements that put the public at serious health risk?

Considering the above, is the nation led to believe that the Guyana EPA and GWI has become devoid of technically qualified professionals to advise against such statements that put the public at serious health risk?

I hope this missive will implore the GWI to immediately do the right and responsible thing to apologetically retract their advice to consume such unsafe water, and to follow-up with urgent actions to satisfy its only mandate to provide the nation with mankind’s most precious substance and basic need for a safe water supply, especially in a nation with the highest GDP.

In the meantime, I humbly wish to dissuade the public from following GWI’s inexplicably advice that the water is safe, despite its irrefutable scientific indications of being hazardous to human health.

THE 592 GUARDIAN ♦ ACCOUNTABILITY JOURNALISM

The Ali Farm -From Bankroller to Blackmailer

/0 Comments/in , /by

THE 592 GUARDIAN ◊ Independent Accountability Journalism For Guyana

The Ali Farm -From Bankroller to Blackmailer

Almost without exception, Guyanese across the board, are familiar about the kind of upstanding citizen and leader that Pres Ali is.  They have a good idea about the quality of his character, the beauties of his activities.  Their leader is a winner.  He touches mud and magic happens: many minerals massed on his table.  I need some of that to rub off on me.  Thus, I stay close to the president.  As he goes, I go.

The man, main voice, from WIN, Mr. Mohamed dropped his aerial bombardment flush on the head of Mohamed Irfaan Ali.  It’s the president and none other.  Sparks have since flew.  Shards of expensive plate glass whizzing dangerously close.  The record shows that Pres Ali has not taken what WIN Mohamed shared publicly sitting down.  He went on an offensive of his own.  The land is ole story.  There are loans.  Documents to burst the archives.  Pres Ali saved his secret weapon for last.  It is one dipped in deadly curare: blackmail.  Azruddin Mohamed delivered his message express mail.  A U.S. carrier, I think.  Pres Ali fired back even quicker.  There’s his verbal delivery.  Blackmail.  Well, blow me down!

Wasn’t it the PPP of Ali, Jagdeo, and Nandlall, who once treasured the Mohamed Family above all else?  Yes or no, folks?  Was it not the PPP Govt that turned against the Mohamed family that was so good to its members (bank rolled, remember?) And turned the father and son over to the tender ministrations of Uncle Sam.  It would be helpful if any of the superstars in the Office of the President, including old Burnham ones, could say what kind of mail is that one?  Drink a man rum.  Feast at his table.  Dance to his music.  Tek out selfees wid he.  Collect he bankroll.  Then, tun pun he.  Wha is dah, white mail, greenmail, or blackmail?  My interest is not in who blackmail who first.  But how is it that blackmail enters the political frame?  Pres Ali is reported to be a very clever fellow.  Therefore, he ought to know (or be advised) that the claim of blackmail doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on.  Not when it’s open-air.  Not when everyone is watching, listening, and following the sequence of actions.  Because Pres Ali enjoys such a special relationship with the U.S., he should reach out to Excellency Theriot and have her check with the FBI on the validity of what I assert.

Further, blackmail caan wuk, Mistah President.  Not when there are documents.  Like transport(s) for the Long Creek lands.  Like the loan applications.  Like the loan approvals with rubberstamps, revenues stamps, raised seals, authorized commercial bank personnel, and in the originals.  I would hope that the loan officers and land officers have not all left Guyana to take up permanent residence in the U.S. in the last few days.  Mohamed could tri wah evah blackmail he want.  But a man of the resourcefulness and adaptability of Dr. Irfaan Ali has his own mail.  They don’t give doctorates to dummies.  It is not snail mail.  It is not mail with a different kind of gender identifier.  What Pres Ali has is a mailed fist.  Waan fuh mess wid mee?  Ah readee!

The point I go to great lengths to make is that Pres Ali doesn’t have to bluff.  Or engage in any boisterous bacchanalian bravado.  He has the best mail available.  His standing with personal honesty.  Incumbency advantage.  The numerous tools and vast resources of the state (an oil rich state).  Plus, the Guyanese people believe in him.  Well, sort of, and only some.  How many for him this week versus last week, that’s the question?  Guyanese catching hell, and there’s no question about their condition.  Pres Ali has to ride beyond the blackmail he claims and put out the cleanest slate.

If there are hiccups, he might as well cleanout his desk.  Grace and peace, Mr. President.

Super El Niño threatens to unleash one of the most destructive Seasons

/0 Comments/in , /by

THE 592 GUARDIAN ◊ ACCOUNTABILITY JOURNALISM ◊ FOR GUYANA

Super El Niño threatens to unleash one of the most destructive Seasons

As a Super El Niño threatens to unleash one of the most destructive seasons in recent memory, a provocative scientific paper asks a difficult question: if we can’t stop the planet from warming fast enough, should we consider temporarily dimming the sun to blunt the worst impacts?

A team at Scripps Institution of Oceanography used climate models — and lessons from the 2019–20 Australian “Black Summer” fires — to test whether marine cloud brightening, a form of solar geoengineering, could tamp down a powerful El Niño. The idea is simple in concept and fiendishly complex in execution: spray sea-salt aerosols into low ocean clouds so they reflect more sunlight, cool the tropical Pacific, and reduce the spike in global temperatures that a Super El Niño would bring.

Their models show it might work — at least partially. Targeted cloud brightening applied early could shave roughly 40 percent off peak El Niño warming in the simulations. That could translate into fewer heatwaves, smaller wildfires, reduced crop failures, and less pressure on overstretched health and emergency systems. For regions like the Caribbean and Guyana, where livelihoods depend on stable rainy seasons, fisheries and agriculture, and where disasters quickly overwhelm limited response capacity, any tool that lowers immediate harm is tempting.

But temptation is not policy. The paper is a proof of concept, not a policy prescription — and for good reason. The gulf between a model result and a safe, effective technology is vast. Engineers currently lack sprayers capable of delivering the right quantity and size of particles over the required ocean areas. Models still struggle to predict the cascading, remote effects of changing cloud reflectivity on global rainfall patterns. And there is real risk of overcorrection: a “too strong” intervention could trigger a mega La Niña with its own catalogue of floods, storms and agricultural disruption.

Beyond technical uncertainty lie profound ethical and geopolitical questions. Who decides to dim the sun for months or years? A handful of wealthy states, private funders, or an international process that includes the most vulnerable voices? The distributional stakes are enormous: a change that reduces heat in one place might reduce rain in another, hitting small island states, farmers, or urban poor who already carry the heaviest climate burdens. Then there’s the moral hazard: the more credible a techno-fix becomes, the more it risks blunting the political urgency to cut greenhouse gas emissions — the only durable solution to the climate crisis.

So what should policymakers, civil society and the public in the Caribbean and Guyana take from this study? First: don’t be distracted. Geoengineering research must be watched, regulated and debated transparently, but it is not a substitute for rapid emissions cuts or for costly, necessary adaptation. Second: demand a voice. Any international discussion of geoengineering governance must include the countries most at risk. We cannot allow decisions about global sunlight to be taken behind closed doors by institutions or corporations with little stake in our futures. Third: invest in readiness. Whether or not marine cloud brightening ever becomes viable, this decade will bring some of the highest-stakes weather in living memory. Strengthening water management, resilient agriculture, early-warning systems and health infrastructure is non-negotiable.

Finally, treat this science as what it is: an alarm bell. The study underlines a brutal truth — climate change is not a gradual nuisance; it is pushing natural systems like El Niño into new, more dangerous regimes. If a high-tech intervention is even being discussed as a possible emergency tool, that is evidence of failure, not ingenuity. Our response should be proportionate: accelerate deep emissions cuts, fund adaptation where lives and livelihoods hang in the balance, and build inclusive, binding governance for any research into planetary-scale interventions.

We cannot let the lure of a quick technical fix derail our political will. The choice before us is stark: commit to the long, difficult work of decarbonisation and resilience now, or gamble with untested manipulations of the very system that sustains life on Earth.

THE 592 GUARDIAN — EDITORIAL BOARD, JULY 2026

The Ali Farm -Fish, Fowl, Foals

/0 Comments/in , /by

THE 592 GUARDIAN — EDITORIAL BOARD

The Ali Farm –Fish, Fowl, Foals -another Episode

Land ahoy!  There’s a sheepfold.  Followed by a cow palace.  A rich field for fowls.  Then, a shrimp lake.  One could get lost in a daze.  For those are only a glimpse of what grazes in Guyana’s Pres Ali’s grand garden.  A mere handful of what teems in Excellency Ali’s lush nature resort.  His Animal Farm that functions with Space Age precision.  And a budget to match.

By any count, Pres Ali’s pastoral paradise tucked behind the stone façade and bushes of the Soesdyke-Linden Highway is like a Rockefeller Trust.  A combination of hacienda and encomienda; one fitting for a maharajah.  Only the best for the best: in beauty, what billions make happen.  I congratulate Pres Ali on his prowess with remarkable success.  I plead with my national leader: a president who is more than a president.  One bigger and better than any Wall Street powerhouse.  Move over Morgan Stanley.  PPP Guyana has Mohamed Irfaan Ali.  What’s the secret, skipper, of all this success?  I won’t tell.

Pres Ali has been forthcoming, a barrel of cooperation, truckloads of transparency.  Assets accumulated before becoming president.  By golly!  Anything of this grandiosity takes some doing!  For that means the flow of funds, and the alignment of the stars: bold banks backing a big hitter of a batter. 

 Remember: back then he was only a minister.  When he was earning less than a million, maybe half, monthly.  I learn again about ‘too big to fail.’  Ah, the talent to identify a tycoon on the move, a star waiting to be born.

I recall that it was in Guyana’s sleepy, prehistoric, paleolithic age.  That is, its distressed nonoil era.  Loans were low.  Movement was slow.  But the president said it: loans.  I congratulate the now president on his superb, platinum, creditworthiness back then.   I behold a budding fairytale in the making, waiting to burst into the scene.  Taking notes.  Must scribble one of those.  Try this title: Dreams come true.

What was needed in circumstances involving big lands for a big man with a big appetite for risk was a big bank. Perhaps, a syndicate of such big banks required.  To cushion the risks of lending enormous sums for a project of that spectacular dimensions. Banks exist for risk-taking, don’t they?  On a conservative scale, naturally, since it’s other people’s money.  For the dead certain, can’t lose stuff-special livestock breeds, rare aquaculture species, a riot of seeds, and other Medellin-type arboreal touches-put into it.  Those all cost quite a bundle of millions.  Think billions.  It would take more than one bank to lend one man that many millions. 

A consortium taking big risks based on what collaterals, what assurances, what guarantors?  Those are the products of my inquiring mind.  Regarding guarantors, who would those be?  Pres Ali should find it easy to trot them out and line them up.  Former presidents could be among such helpful souls.  Ready to give a young man a break.  A good deed done.  But what about the little people of Guyana?  What strokes for such folks?

Street level, grassroots, minibus riding Guyanese have to line up, wait, and hold their breath for 10 years or more for a single plot of land.  There must be a different standard at work for other citizens.  Those who are not political leaders, not business leaders, not government ministers, and not members of parliament.  Because it seems that for every square inch of house lot space that a teacher, soldier, or pensioner is awarded, fat cats and bigshots snare an acre.  And what takes 10 years for the small people require 10 hours, maybe 10 minutes, to get approved by the relevant authorities for Guyanese big people.  If all this is off the reservation, then I plead to the kind in Guyana for enlightenment.  Where am I going wrong?

Truly World-class

Land ahoy!  Compass bearings: Long Creek, Linden Highway.  Pres Ali is in for many a long day.  There’s a silver lining.  Excellency Ali says he has the goods.  They had better be good.

The Ali Farm -Fish, Fowl, and Foals -Pt IV

/0 Comments/in , /by

The 592 Guardian◊Accountability Journalism◊ July 2026

The –Fish, Fowl, and Foals -Pt IV

Pres Ali has contributed to the broadening story of blackbelly sheep, prime cattle, land and a mindboggling array of other rich attractions.  I thank the president, commend him.  Now I share some words of my own on what’s part farm, part estate, part futuristic model, part politics, part commerce, and part of many unknowns.

First, on such a gargantuan development, the president may not be the only investor and overseer.  He may have company, a pantheon of illustrious names and personalities.  Who else among locals, who from foreign shores, have hand and interest in this business of shrimp, shrub, and so much more that captivates the mind?

Second, for a project of this monstrous expanse, much seed money and maintenance (operational) money had to go into it.  To get it going, to keep it going.  From the revelations, the millions multiplied by the hundreds, then rolled into the billions.  Those dollar numbers look plausible, even though on the lean and mean side.   From where that money came?  Who are the people with that kind of money?  Those are two of the first questions that stir.

For color, I recall how many regional and international kingmakers came to Guyana during that distressing 2019-20 time.  Some were already resident here.  Many Guyanese should recall how they involved themselves way beyond the dictates of protocol, etiquette, and accepted norms in Guyana’s politics and its domestic brawls.  Unprecedented and highly unusual, I assert.  Further, in the years since 2020, some past senior diplomatic presences have returned here in different capacities. 

Either as head of official delegations; or more stealthily.  Probably to sidestep local radars. 

Do they have any proximity, any type of association, to this Great Animal Farm deep inside the Linden Highway?  Were their involvements in the 2020 fiasco part of their initial down payments? 

With their own spreadsheets and calculators held in reserve.  Speaking for myself, I am convinced that this stunning animal farm, currently mentioned alongside his name only, is bigger than Guyana’s Pres Ali.

Third, it is surprising that there is a project with its grandiose sprawl, with all of its possibilities, is in full swing, and former president Bharrat Jagdeo is a seemingly disinterested and disengaged party.  Quite abnormal for a character of his proportions, I think.  And not to forget his history with projects of stature.

Fourth, all Guyana is aware of how big and committed Dr. Jagdeo and the PPP are on agriculture.  The sidelines and silence do not fit into the mold.  Not when there is a megaproject of this magnificence, and with agriculture and aquaculture all the rage.  Not having a say, and not knowing of this way so well-mapped out, does strike differently.  These are among the tips of the iceberg not yet sticking their noses above water.

Fifth, I recall that some blackbelly sheep were part of a country-to-country (Barbados to Guyana) transaction a few years back.  The blackbelly sheep reported on Pres Ali’s farm: are they from that flock or some other source?

Sixth, that mega-farm, a conglomerate by any reckoning, should have, as a matter of sound business practice, the export market in mind.  Quality products for quality people in quality places and at quality prices.  Scale is what matters.  I am thinking a port and an airstrip have to be part of the farm program to complete the circle.  And, considering the size of this great field of endeavor, I cannot help thinking of who, besides, President Ali, have set themselves up for some rich harvesting.  Guyanese do well to hold close to this formula: 25 X 2025 + 5.  I translate: Food security level by a stated deadline (now past), but with another half decade attached to accommodate delivery.

Last: what else could be in this Ali Animal Farm?  Plenty, I think.

The Uranium Blindspot.Guyana Is Licensing What It Cannot Regulate

/0 Comments/in , , /by

 THE 592 GUARDIAN♦Independent Accountability Journalism♦Governance, Politics & Extractive Industry
 July 2026

The Uranium Blindspot: Guyana Is Licensing What It Cannot Regulate
As U92 Energy Corp. advances drill programmes at the Kurupung uranium project, the government has yet to answer a foundational question: who, in Guyana, can actually tell if something is going wrong?

I. THE WARNING CANNOT BE DISMISSED
Dr. Vincent Adams is not a critic of mining. He is a former head of Guyana’s Environmental Protection Agency and a professional who has overseen uranium remediation programmes in the United States — a country that spent decades and hundreds of billions of dollars confronting contamination legacies it did not anticipate when licences were first issued. He has chaired international conferences on uranium mining’s environmental footprint, drawing participants from more than sixty countries, including Kazakhstan, one of the world’s largest uranium producers. When Dr. Adams says Guyana does not have what it takes to regulate uranium mining — that the country’s institutions have no clue what they are getting into — he is not raising a theoretical concern.
He is delivering a professional judgment grounded in direct comparative experience. And this government has not answered it.

“Guyana just based on their track record do not have it, they do not understand what it takes to have it, and they have no interest in providing that capacity to take on such an operation. They have no clue what they are getting into. Have no clue whatsoever.” — Dr. Vincent Adams, former EPA Head

That silence is the story. Not because uranium mining is inherently incompatible with Guyana’s development — Dr. Adams himself does not argue that — but because the government has issued licences, approved exploration, and allowed a foreign junior mining company to consolidate a decadeof technical data on Guyanese soil without publicly demonstrating that any regulatory body in this country can independently verify what that company is doing, or will be doing, in the interior of Region Seven.

II. WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN LICENSED
The facts on the ground are specific and deserve to be stated precisely. On 19 April 2024, the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission granted Exclusive Prospecting Licences to LIA (Guyana) Inc. — a wholly-owned subsidiary of Singapore-registered LIA Industries Pte. Ltd., incorporated in Guyana in March 2023, just one month before the licences were issued. Those licences cover not only uranium but other radioactive minerals and rare earth elements across 92.2 square kilometres of Region Seven.
The licences run for three years to 18 April 2027 with the possibility of two additional one-year extensions — meaning this project could remain active and expanding through April 2029 without any new licensing decision by the government.

Adam Clode CEO – U 92 Corp.

Canada-based U92 Energy Corp. has since acquired the complete historical technical and exploration dataset for the Kurupung project, which it describes as carrying a historical resource estimate of 20.6 million pounds of uranium. This is U 92’s only listed project. The company has finalised a commercial agreement for a Phase One 5,000-metre diamond drilling programme and submitted the required environmental application for drill pad preparation. The company’s entire commercial existence rests on this single Guyanese concession.
The GGMC issued licences to an entity incorporated one month before the grant date. It has offered no public account of what due diligence was conducted on LIA Industries’ technical capacity, financial standing, or environmental track record.
The GGMC has offered no public account of what due diligence was conducted on LIA Industries’ technical capacity, financial standing, or environmental track record prior to that April 2024 grant. The Environmental Protection Agency has not published any environmental impact assessment, baseline study, or radiation monitoring protocol for the Kurupung project. The Guyana Nuclear Energy Authority — the body nominally responsible for radiological matters — has not issued a public statement on the project’s regulatory framework. Parliament has not been briefed. The public has not been consulted.

III. THE REGULATORY INDEPENDENCE PROBLEM
Dr. Adams identified the core structural failure with precision. It is not simply that Guyana lacks technical personnel with uranium expertise — though that is true. The deeper problem is the absence of what he calls regulatory independence: the institutional capacity for the government to independently verify what an operator is doing, rather than relying on operator-reported data.
In every sophisticated resource jurisdiction, regulatory independence is the foundational safeguard. It requires trained government scientists and engineers who can read drill logs critically, interpret radiological readings independently, identify anomalies in waste management, and assess water contamination risks without being dependent on the company’s own consultants for their understanding of what is happening. It requires laboratory infrastructure, monitoring networks, and institutional knowledge built over time.
Guyana has none of this for uranium. It does not exist. It is not being built. No minister has announced a timeline for its construction. The 2024 licences were issued into a regulatory vacuum.

The government has adopted a model in oil and gas where operators submit their own environmental compliance data to agencies that lack the independent capacity to contest it. That same model, applied to radioactive mineral extraction, is not a governance shortcut — it is a liability being transferred permanently onto the Guyanese people.
Dr. Adams drew explicit parallels to the oil and gas sector, where Guyana’s environmental governance record is already a subject of documented concern. The Environmental Protection Agency has been criticised by civil society and international observers for its limited capacity to independently audit Exxon, Hess, and CNOOC compliance data. The GGMC’s own audit trail is in a state of chronic disrepair — a matter this outlet documented in its investigation into the Commission’s nine-year audit backlog.

The pattern is institutional, not incidental.
The government has adopted a model in extractive industry governance where operators submit their own environmental compliance data to agencies that lack the independent capacity to contest it. That model, applied to uranium and radioactive mineral extraction, is not a governance shortcut. It is a liability being transferred — permanently and multi-generationally — onto the Guyanese people.
IV. URANIUM IS NOT OIL
There is a reason Dr. Adams specified that countries which engaged in uranium mining decades ago are still spending heavily on contamination and rehabilitation today. Uranium mining’s legacy contamination problem is structural. Tailings — the waste material left after uranium extraction — remain radioactive for thousands of years. Acid mine drainage from uranium operations can travel through groundwater systems in ways that are difficult to predict, harder to reverse, and catastrophic in communities dependent on river water. Radon gas exposure poses chronic health risks to workers and surrounding populations. The Kurupung basin sits in a region of significant biodiversity and within watersheds that feed communities across Cuyuni-Mazaruni.

In the United States, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission maintain distinct, technically staffed regulatory bodies for uranium mining. Australia’s regulatory framework for uranium is administered under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act with site-specific environmental management plans, independent auditing, and bonding requirements calibrated to decommissioning costs. Canada — the country of U92’s own domicile — requires that uranium mining operators demonstrate financial assurance for the full cost of remediation before a single shovel breaks ground.
Guyana has no equivalent framework. It has not announced one. It has not committed to a timeline for developing one. It has issued the licences and proceeded.
V. WHAT ACCOUNTABILITY REQUIRES
This editorial makes five specific demands of the government of Guyana, each proportionate to the scale of what is being licensed:
1. The GGMC must publish the full due diligence record supporting the April 2024 licence grant to LIA (Guyana) Inc., including financial assurance documentation, technical capacity assessments, and any independent environmental baseline studies conducted prior to the licence decision.
2. The Environmental Protection Agency must publish its environmental compliance framework for radioactive mineral exploration and extraction — if one exists. If it does not exist, the EPA must state that publicly and provide a timeline for its development before drill pad preparation proceeds.
3. The Guyana Nuclear Energy Authority must issue a public statement on its regulatory mandate over the Kurupung project, the staffing and laboratory capacity it currently possesses for uranium oversight, and what additional capacity it requires. This statement must be made before Phase One drilling commences.
4. The Natural Resources Committee of the National Assembly must convene a hearing at which Dr. Adams, the GGMC, the EPA, and the GNEA are required to appear together and answer questions about the regulatory gap on the public record. The opposition has both the right and the obligation to demand this hearing.
5. U92 Energy Corp. must be required to post full remediation bonding — calibrated to worst-case decommissioning costs by an independent environmental engineering firm — before any exploratory drilling occurs. A junior mining company whose sole listed project is this concession cannot be permitted to internalise the upside of resource extraction while externalising the remediation liability onto Guyanese taxpayers and communities.
VI. THE PATTERN THIS GOVERNMENT MUST ACCOUNT FOR
This is not the first time The 592 Guardian has documented the government’s approach of licensing what it cannot regulate. The Wales Gas-to-Energy project was advanced through procurement structures involving Venezuelan-linked entities and an intermediary payroll vehicle before any credible independent environmental audit of the site was published. The GGMC’s own institutional audit trail has not been reconciled in nearly a decade. The GPL-InterEnergy sole-source contract was executed without the competitive tendering that Guyanese law requires. The Guyana EITI validation process — meant to provide at least a minimum standard of extractive industry transparency — was convened under circumstances that this outlet documented firsthand as procedurally compromised.

The uranium sector is being opened in exactly this context. Not as an isolated governance failure but as a continuation of a documented institutional posture: licence first, regulate never, audit retrospectively if at all, and frame any accountability demand as an obstacle to development.

Dr. Adams did not frame his warning as opposition to development. He framed it as a prerequisite for responsible development. That distinction matters. It forecloses the government’s default deflection — that criticism of the regulatory framework is criticism of resource extraction itself. It is not. It is a demand that the government of Guyana demonstrate that it can protect its own people from the consequences of what it is authorising on their behalf.

If the government cannot demonstrate that it possesses the regulatory capacity to independently monitor uranium mining operations at Kurupung, then it has no legal, moral, or constitutional basis to allow those operations to proceed.
If the government cannot demonstrate that it possesses the regulatory capacity to independently monitor uranium mining operations at Kurupung — to detect contamination before it becomes irreversible, to hold an operator accountable for radiological breaches, to protect workers and downstream communities from exposures they will never consent to — then it has no legal, moral, or constitutional basis to allow those operations to proceed.

The burden of proof is on the government. It has not discharged it. The 592 Guardian will continue to report on this matter until it does.
— The Editorial Board, The 592 Guardian
The 592 Guardian | Accountability Journalism for Guyana | www.592guardian.com

Pres Ali: Be wise, Go beyond the Norm -Pt III

/0 Comments/in , /by

THE 592 GUARDIAN ◊ACCOUNTABILITY◊OBJECTIVITY◊JOURNALISM FOR GUYANA 

Pres Ali: Be wise, Go beyond the Norm -Pt III

The disclosures pinpointed monumental asset accumulations with Pres Ali’s name immovably affixed.  He has acknowledged that the farm property is his.  A great start.  So also, all the inanimate structures, and all the thriving, exotic, life forms, that form part of a physical animal farm.  He admits they have been in his portfolio for years.  Years prior to his ascendancy to the number one office in Guyana.  It’s not an office to be trifled with: many citizens revere the very title.  Even seen by some as sacred.  Due to the developments now moving like an out-of-control avalanche around this much-talked about farm, and not in a good way, Pres Ali has his work cut out for him.  He must go all out to protect the presidency.  He must leave no stone unturned in his efforts to help the presidency emerge from a grim condition to a clean light.                                                                                       

One that’s better than when this deluge of revelations shocked Guyanese silly, and left them stunned.  My kind counsel to the president is that he proves he has nothing to hide.  And because he has nothing to fear, there will only be the straightest, cleanest, and most persuasive of outcomes about this farm. 

Neither subterfuge nor complexity will intervene in the days ahead.

In the aftermath of Mr. Azruddin Mohamed’s disclosures, it’s vital that Pres Ali discerns that he has a matter before him that calls for the best that’s in him.                                     He defends himself strongly, while manifesting new levels of wisdom.  The wisdom that goes beyond himself.  Place this whole matter, Mr. President, in the hands of others.  Others outside of Guyana.  He is the sitting head-of-state.  Hence, it is not in the best interests of himself and Guyana for this matter to be reviewed and pronounced upon by Guyanese.  Wrong move. 

A local study/inquiry of what’s now public would invite contentiousness.  Over what appears artificial.  About what looks like a whitewash.  Past appointed local bodies have attracted endless criticisms re their terms of reference, procedures, actual probes. 

 They have raised more questions and controversy than provided answers and closure.  Recommendation: place this locally insoluble matter in foreign hands.  For full disclosure of the facts, as tracked and treated.  From how they came into existence, to identification of all involved parties.

It would help immensely if the Integrity Commission Act is amended to allow disclosure of submissions in situations such as these.  Frankly,, I do not support any arrangement where the assets of politicians are kept secret.  This would cover from their earnings to their acquisitions to their liquidations.  Further, any amended Integrity Commission Act must provide for a majority of its members to be drawn from civil society, as nominated by civil society.  From that majority a chair is chosen.  Of what strength, what utility is a chair, chosen by a government, when a member of that same government, has to be scrutinized?

President Ali, any politician, any public servant, has a right to mount the most vigorous defense when claims are made about their conduct in office.  I endorse that to the fullest. 

Using the same standard, the public, the taxpayer, the electorate, is entitled to an inquiry that is hoped to be authentic, appears to be authentic, and is authentic.  In its probity.  In the quality of its work and output.  In the confidence that it inspires.  There is a system.  It is working and it delivers.

I wish Pres Ali well.  I wish also that he would be most seriously engaged in allowing full ventilation of what is encircled and embedded in his farm cum estate.  Through those wishes, I think that much could be achieved.  The air must be cleared.  So that this matter is put to rest., once and for all.