Names, Numbers, and Power:   Why the System Turned on  Dr. Jadoopat.

/in , /by

BY: Staff Writer 

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣

There is an uncomfortable truth at the heart of Guyana’s extractive sector—one that powerful interests would prefer buried, redacted, or quietly erased. That truth is this: transparency was not only achieved, it was documented, published, and made accessible to the public under the stewardship of Dr.Rudy Jadoopat.

As National Coordinator of the Guyana Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (GYEITI) from 2017 to 2022, Dr.Jadoopat did what few in public office have dared to do—he operationalized transparency. Not as a slogan, but as a system. Not as rhetoric, but as verifiable data.

Under his leadership, Guyana did not merely subscribe to the EITI International Standard; it implemented it. The GYEITI National Secretariat was not just established—it was structured, managed, and driven to deliver measurable compliance with international requirements for accountability across oil and gas, mining, forestry, and fisheries.

But it is in the Annexes of the GYEITI Reports where the real story lies.

Those Annexes did not deal in abstractions. They named names. They detailed dates. They identified acreages, locations, and license numbers. They exposed, in plain data, the architecture of Guyana’s extractive economy—particularly the sprawling and notoriously opaque gold mining sector.

And therein lay the problem.

Because when transparency is real, it becomes inconvenient.

The disclosures did not discriminate. They revealed:

connections—individuals, associates, and entities tied to influence and power. Figures such as Su Zhi Rong, Ivor English,  Joe Harmon, Simona Broomes Ramzan Ali, Jagmohan and others emerged not through speculation, but through documented records. The Alphonso family reportedly holds claims to over one million acres of gold mining concessions. It is also alleged that they are part of the Multi-Stakeholder Group and serve as financiers of political parties and their leadership. Additionally, they are said to have the ability to influence state officials, including appointments and the removal of GGMC officers with whom they are not aligned.

The data spoke for itself, and it did so publicly.

For the political and economic elite, this was intolerable.

Transparency, when it begins to illuminate networks of privilege and proximity, is no longer celebrated—it becomes a threat.

What followed raises serious questions.

Jadoopat’s removal from his position did not occur in a vacuum. It coincided with growing unease about the breadth and accessibility of the information released. More troubling are the reported alterations to previously published datasets—columns removed, including critical fields such as “Date Granted” for concessions. These are not cosmetic edits; they strike at the integrity of the record.

Such actions, if verified, suggest not routine data management, but deliberate sanitization.

And here lies a critical miscalculation.

The data was never confined to a single server or website. It was downloaded, archived, and distributed. Local stakeholders, international organizations, and oversight bodies already possess the raw datasets. The attempt to retroactively obscure or modify public disclosures is not only futile—it invites deeper scrutiny.

Because in the age of digital transparency, erasure is not easily achieved. It is, however, easily detected.

What Guyana now faces is not simply a question of governance, but of credibility. The international community, including EITI oversight mechanisms and allied institutions, is watching closely—not just what is said, but what is changed, removed, or concealed.

Transparency cannot be selectively applied. It cannot be embraced when convenient and dismantled when uncomfortable.

If Guyana is to maintain any claim to accountability in its extractive industries, then the integrity of its disclosures must be defended—not diluted.

The work done between 2017 and 2022 set a benchmark. The question now is whether that benchmark will be upheld—or quietly undone.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦—

Appeal Court Undermines Critical Oil Spill Safeguard with Parent Guarantee Ruling

/in , /by

BY: Dr. Vincent Adams

While looking ahead to a likely appeal to the Caribbean Court of Justice, Guyanese and Caribbean citizens must be worried sick about the Appeal Court’s devastating overturn of Justice Sandil Kissoon’s May 3, 2023 sage landmark Decision requiring Stabroek Block operator, ExxonMobil (Exxon) Guyana Limited (EMGL) to provide a Parent Company Guarantee (PCG) from its parent company Exxon and affiliates CNOOC and HESS to cover 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬 related to an oil spill.

As the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Head who created the PCG policy as the only necessary means to protect Guyana’s interest, with all due respect to the Court, I hands down disagree with its overturning of Kissoon’s profoundly thorough understanding of the context and well thought out Decision heralding the nostalgic feeling of national independence until now when ironically, the nation is about to celebrate its 60th anniversary of independence. Founding fathers Forbes Burnham and Cheddi Jagan must be turning in their graves witnessing the surrendering of Guyana’s sovereignty to new colonial masters such as corporate giant Exxon.       

Unbelievably, although Exxon unconscionably corrals 86% of Guyana’s God given oil patrimony, the Court still chose to exonerate this filthy rich oil giant from all liabilities. EMGL, and 𝐧𝐨𝐭 Exxon, is the sole contractor party to the Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) and all permits; and so, owns all of the liabilities despite 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐭𝐬 to cover an oil spill. Consequently, in the event of a spill, EMGL declares bankruptcy and Exxon goes scot-free, leaving Guyana holding the bag of financial bankruptcy and environmental catastrophe – unquestionably the trickery behind Exxon creating EMGL to insulate itself from liability; hence, the necessity for originating the PCG to save Guyana. Exxon would never get away with such a scheme in its home country of the USA; but, as Judge Kissoon wisely puts it “EMGL is engaged in a course of action 𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐥𝐞 only by the omissions of a 𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐭, 𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐄𝐏𝐀…putting this nation and its people in 𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐩𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐭𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫.”

Unfortunately, it appears that the Court accepted the nonsensical ghost defence arguments that the word “unlimited” is not in the permits; and that the guarantee should be capped with an estimate. The following EPA permit clauses in litigation are presented below for readers to judge for yourselves:   

Clause 14:1 “The Permit Holder (EMGL) is liable for 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬 associated with” an oil spill. 𝐍𝐨𝐭𝐞 the specificity of 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬 (definition of “unlimited”) which means 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐝 for example at the phantom $2 Billion estimate (accepted by the Court).

Clause 14:10 “EMGL must provide from the Parent Company or CoVenturers (CNOOC and HESS) one or more legally binding agreements in which they undertake to provide adequate financial resources to pay their respective environmental obligations if EMGL “𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐨 ”. 𝐍𝐨𝐭𝐞 the specificity of “if EMGL 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐨”– dictating that parent Exxon must provide financial assurances/guarantee for 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬 which EMGL cannot pay (𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐨) Again, the definition of “unlimited”.  

In summary, clause 14.1 mandates that EMGL as the permit holder is responsible for 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬. However, if EMGL has inadequate resources to cover all costs “ 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥 𝐭𝐨 𝐝𝐨 𝐬𝐨 ”, then 14.10 orders that deep pocket parent Exxon and CoVenturers are liable for 𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬 over what EMGL can cover. It is therefore unfathomable how such “unambiguous language” (Judge Kissoon’s words) could mean anything but an “unlimited guarantee”, since 𝐚𝐥𝐥 means no limit. Yes, the term “unlimited” is not mentioned in the permit, but that is ghost argument if the words mentioned mean the same as “unlimited”. Confusingly, the Court also found that “while Exxon remains liable for pollution related damages, that liability does not automatically require unlimited financial assurance”, completely ignoring the key operative words “𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬” at Clause 14.10 which could only mean “liability for 𝐚𝐥𝐥 pollution related damages”. It begs the question, why were key words “𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐬” so visibly omitted from this most consequential finding?

Further, instead of “unlimited guarantee”, the ruling required an estimate of the damage as Financial Assurance, hinting that the Court may have been terribly misled that such an estimate is possible or ever done. Whosoever could do such an estimate has to be a fortune teller and should immediately purchase a lottery ticket. Nonetheless, just to humor such an ludicrous thought, the only possible estimating method would be of an analogous type using a similar situation such as the Macondo oil spill which occurred in our backyard, gushing 5 million barrels oil for 87 days costing British Petroleum $US145 B– none of which was, or could have been estimated! thereby leading to the million dollar question that was not addressed by the Court as to who will pay the cost of a Macondo type spill over and above Exxon’s farcical US $2B Assurance? It must be noted that this $2B ploy was Exxon’s first attempt in 2019 with insurance papers in hand to counter the EPA’s demand for the PCG, but it was instantly rejected.     

Another frivolous defence argument was that there was no specific PCG, when in fact, there can be no more of a substantively bona fide PCG than the legal language in the EPA Permits shown earlier. The only required side Agreement was to be amongst Exxon, CNOOC and HESS referenced in clause 14.10 earlier as the “binding agreement” to show how the three entities will share “pay their respective environmental obligations” which had to be approved by the EPA before start of operation. If the Govt testified that such an Agreement never existed, then they admitted to violating the permits by approving startups without that Agreement. The Court should have hoisted them by their own petard.

Sadly, the whole crux of the matter flies in the face of Guyana’s sovereignty at this time of the nation’s momentous 60th independence anniversary celebration, when Exxon is being enabled by authorities to evade its moral and financial obligation to bear all costs of spill damages occurring from operations earning it $Trillions, while cold bloodedly exposing to financial and environmental ruins, the poverty-stricken country that generously furnishes its wealth. Worse yet, besides dumping billions of barrels of hot, toxic, radioactive and oil laced produced water into our clean ocean, destroying its ecology and millions of fish eggs and fish life, and flaring of billions of cubic feet of toxic produced gas into our pristine air, causing health, acid rain, and climate change problems, Exxon is green-lighted to recklessly produce above the legal safe limits enshrined in the Environmental Impact Assessment, thus enhancing the chances of a spill without any liability coverage by virtue of this ruling. 

With Guyana at its tender age of policy and law making for this critical oil sector, consequential decisions such as this ruling must be informed by the numerous bad lessons learned from other countries. A case in point is the litigation in the British Courts involving Nigerians suing Shell Oil Co. for costs covering oil spills in Nigeria; but, because of the absence of a PCG, Shell’s defence was that the spills occurred under their subsidiary company as their operator, making Shell not liable. Surprise! Surprise!

Also, Repsol which operates in Guyana, was responsible for a small 12,000 barrels oil spill in Peru; and absent tight liability laws, the Government was forced to seize the passports of Repsol’s Executives and sued the company for US $Billions for cleanup and other liabilities, in addition to urgently establishing new laws to protect Peru from recurrences of this kind.

Lastly, it must not go unnoticed that Exxon had willingly agreed to, signed, and honored the PCG language first enshrined in the yellowtail exploration well permit in 2019 and repeated in all of the subsequent permits thereafter; but, only became an issue when the PPPC took office and sided with Exxon to negate it, resulting in the lawsuit by the two patriotic citizens that has brought us to this point.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦—

Government’s Rice Gamble Backfires

/in /by

BY: Hem Kumar 

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣

This is what happens when policy is crafted on the fly and dressed up as strategy.

The Government rolled out a $3 billion rice subsidy with a glaring loophole—an acreage-based payout structure that practically invites manipulation. Now that farmers are responding exactly as any rational actor would, the Agriculture Minister is reaching for the police instead of the mirror.

That is not leadership. That is deflection.

You cannot design a system that rewards smaller declared acreage with higher per-acre payments and then act shocked when large-scale farmers begin restructuring on paper. That outcome was not accidental—it was inevitable. Any serious policymaker would have seen it coming.

But instead of building safeguards into the framework from the start, the Government rushed the announcement, threw out attractive figures, and left the back door wide open.
Now the same administration is warning farmers not to “smart the system.”

The uncomfortable truth is this: the system was not smart to begin with.
Farmers are not operating in a vacuum. They are dealing with collapsing paddy prices, skyrocketing input costs, and shrinking margins. When survival is on the line, people will adapt. What the Minister is calling manipulation, many would call basic economic response.
And yet, rather than fixing the structural weakness, the Government is escalating to threats of prosecution.

This is governance by afterthought.
If the Guyana Rice Development Board already had detailed acreage records—as the Minister now claims—why were those records not used to design a subsidy mechanism that could not be easily gamed? Why introduce a tiered system without enforcement triggers, verification protocols, or clear legal definitions from day one?

Because this was never about precision. It was about presentation.

Announce big numbers. Appear responsive. Deal with the consequences later.
Now the consequences have arrived—and instead of recalibrating policy, the Government is criminalizing predictable behavior.

That is not accountability. That is panic management.

The rice sector does not need threats. It needs competence. It needs policies that are thought through, stress-tested, and grounded in the realities farmers face daily—not improvised measures that collapse under the weight of their own contradictions.

Band-aid governance will always produce bleeding outcomes.

And no amount of warning from a podium can patch what was fundamentally broken at the design stage.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦—

Two gas projects, many more questions, concerns

/in /by

This is a fine example of fiscal prudence, quality leadership, visionary governance.  Two Gas-to-Energy (GTE) projects, and Guyana’s biggest national budget ever is jostling for first place with the two GTEs relative to which requires more billions.  From what is known publicly, the Wales GTE holds steady at US$2.102 billion.  Included is the US$102 million Lindsayca-CH4 won in its soil stability dispute with Guyana.  It is also asking for, more like demanding, an additional US$250 million to get the two remaining jobs it contracted for done.  Namely, completing the gas conversion facility and the power generation plant.  When that US$250 million is added, the Wales GTE is set to cost US$2.352 billion (more than GY$500 billion).  Aside: Pres. Ali has made sanctity of contract the backbone of his refusal to renegotiate the Exxon oil contract.  Let’s see how he responds to Lindsayca-CH4’s push to squeeze another quarter billion US$ out of Guyana.  If he approves, it would hoist the original contract figure of US$759 million for the two unfinished facilities to over US$1 billion.

Though the completion and operationalizing of the Wales GTE is nowhere near to the finish line, a second GTE, this time for Berbice, has made its way into the national consciousness and conversation.  Reports are that it would cost at least twice the price of the Wales GTE.  The Wales GTE is causing Guyana no ends of trouble (reengineering and working around, delays, cost overruns, suitability, and so forth), but Guyana’s movers and shakers are being drawn into another GTE at twice the cost.  It could be asserted with reasonable assurance that the GTE projects will come very close to US$7 billion, if not more (US$2.342 billion for Wales, and US$4.64 billion for the Berbice GTE.  Though he didn’t offer any specific figures, Exxon’s Mr. Alistair Routledge made that clear, set that expectation.  Two GTE projects and a record national budget could be overtaken relative to dollars needed.  The 2026 budget was GY$1.558 trillion.  With Wales and Berbice considered, that’s US$7 billion which will be needed.  I urge my fellow citizens to keep the math simple. Pick a low USD: GY exchange rate.  The result veers uncomfortably close to GY$1.558 trillion that was Guyana’s biggest budget ever.

Can Guyana afford to spend so much on two projects?  As dire as the need is for a cheaper, better supply of energy, does this make sense?  When the problem-plagued Wales GTE isconsidered, Guyanese who can still think for themselves are invited to weigh the value of rushing into another GTE so quickly.  Almost like a reckless gambler, who abandons restraint, and goes on a spree.  

Consequences, be damned.  It is said that a fool and his money are soon parted.  I wonder if this will be the story of Guyana, its leaders, and the decisions they make about putting to the best use the oil money that belongs to the people.  Guyana cannot get going. Guyana cannot get a break.  Guyana is on the backfoot with the Wales GTE, but plunging into a bigger one, as if stone deaf, and blindfolded.  As though there is an addiction in the PPP Govt to joining with others and finding new ways to spend more of the billions (from any source) that are owned, or will be owed, by Guyanese.

A better approach is to get the first one right, and delivering.  Only then, move to a bigger one, despite electricity deficiencies ravaging this country so much.  Delay more added to Cost Oil.  More borrowed.  More withdrawn from the Oil Fund.  If this isn’t madness, then what is?  If not madness, then everyone else is crazy.  Instead of developments and projects to build Guyana sensibly and honestly, the priority is to milk it first.  Then bleed it. Party time, folks.


𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦—

Our Voices, Our Strength

/in , /by

BY: Hem Kumar                             

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣

𝙏𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙨 𝙖 𝙢𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙞𝙣 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮 𝙣𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣’𝙨 𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙧𝙮 𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙣 𝙨𝙞𝙡𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙗𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙨 𝙗𝙚𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙮𝙖𝙡—𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙚𝙨𝙚, 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙢𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙛𝙚𝙚𝙡𝙨 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚 𝙣𝙤𝙬.

Across villages, towns, and cities, a quiet unease has been growing into something louder, something harder to ignore. It is not just about one man. It is not just about one party. It is about a pattern people believe they are seeing—one where power appears to tighten its grip, where justice feels uneven, and where fear is slowly being introduced into spaces that once held hope.

What happened on May 5th did not exist in isolation. It struck a nerve because it confirmed what many have been whispering: that dissent is becoming dangerous, and that those who challenge the status quo may be made examples of.

𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝙮𝙚𝙩—𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙞𝙨 𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙙𝙚𝙘𝙞𝙙𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙬𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙚.

𝘼𝙧𝙚 𝙬𝙚 𝙖 𝙥𝙚𝙤𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙧𝙚𝙩𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙩 𝙞𝙣𝙩𝙤 𝙨𝙞𝙡𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙣 𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙨𝙪𝙧𝙚 𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙚𝙨? 𝙊𝙧 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙬𝙚 𝙖 𝙥𝙚𝙤𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙢𝙚𝙧, 𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙖𝙠 𝙡𝙤𝙪𝙙𝙚𝙧, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙙𝙚𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙗𝙚𝙩𝙩𝙚𝙧—𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙤𝙨, 𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙧𝙖𝙜𝙚?

Because let’s be clear: the road ahead will not be easy. It will test patience. It will test unity. It will test resolve. Those who choose to speak out will be scrutinized, pressured, and at times, isolated. That is the nature of any struggle where power is being questioned.

 𝘽𝙪𝙩 𝙝𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙧𝙮 𝙝𝙖𝙨 𝙣𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙛𝙖𝙫𝙤𝙧𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙨𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙮𝙚𝙙 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚. 𝙄𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙨 𝙖𝙡𝙬𝙖𝙮𝙨 𝙧𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙢𝙗𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙨𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙤𝙙 𝙪𝙥—𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙢𝙡𝙮, 𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙢𝙡𝙮, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙩 𝙖𝙥𝙤𝙡𝙤𝙜𝙮—𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙬𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙧𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩.

𝙏𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖 𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙤 𝙙𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣. 𝙄𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙖 𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙤 𝙖𝙬𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙨𝙨.

It is a call to citizens—regardless of race, class, or political alignment—to pay attention, to ask questions, and to refuse to accept a version of justice that depends on who you are or who you support.

If we allow fear to take root, then we surrender more than a moment—we surrender the very foundation of democracy itself.

And so, as the days unfold and tensions rise, one thing must remain unshaken: the belief that Guyana belongs to its people—not to power, not to intimidation, not to selective justice.

𝘽𝙪𝙩 𝙝𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙧𝙮 𝙝𝙖𝙨 𝙣𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙧 𝙛𝙖𝙫𝙤𝙧𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙨𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙮𝙚𝙙 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚. 𝙄𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙨 𝙖𝙡𝙬𝙖𝙮𝙨 𝙧𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙢𝙗𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙨𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙤 𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙤𝙙 𝙪𝙥—𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙢𝙡𝙮, 𝙛𝙞𝙧𝙢𝙡𝙮, 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙩 𝙖𝙥𝙤𝙡𝙤𝙜𝙮—𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙬𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙧𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩.

𝙏𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖 𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙤 𝙙𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣. 𝙄𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙖 𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙤 𝙖𝙬𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙨𝙨.

Because when justice becomes uncertain, it is not just leaders who are at risk—it is every citizen.

Stand steady. Stay vigilant. And most importantly, do not lose sight of what this is truly about: a Guyana where fairness is not a favor, but a right.

𝙒𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙮𝙚𝙩.

𝘽𝙪𝙩 𝙬𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙗𝙖𝙘𝙠𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙙𝙤𝙬𝙣 𝙚𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧.

𝐓𝐨𝐠𝐞𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫, 𝐖𝐞 𝐑𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐀𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧 — 𝐎𝐝𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐅𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐨𝐦 —  𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣

𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘢𝘭𝘭.

𝘕𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴,

𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘧𝘦𝘢𝘳,

𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘶𝘭𝘭 𝘷𝘰𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘱𝘦𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘦

𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘣𝘦𝘳 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦.

𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘢𝘶𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴

𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘰𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘥𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥,

𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘢𝘧𝘦𝘳,

𝘸𝘩𝘰 𝘣𝘳𝘰𝘬𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘣𝘢𝘤𝘬 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘻𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯

𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭, 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯 𝘶𝘯𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘬𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘧

𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘎𝘶𝘺𝘢𝘯𝘢 𝘣𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘮.

𝘚𝘪𝘹𝘵𝘺 𝘺𝘦𝘢𝘳𝘴 𝘢𝘨𝘰,

𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘸𝘢𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯.

𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘣𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘰 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘦.

𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘥𝘪𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘳𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘰𝘶𝘣𝘵.

𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘳𝘰𝘴𝘦. 𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰𝘥𝘢𝘺—𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘵𝘢𝘱𝘴 𝘶𝘴 𝘰𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘩𝘰𝘶𝘭𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯.

𝘕𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘦𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘺,𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘢𝘴 𝘢 𝘥𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘯𝘥.

𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘣𝘦𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘶𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘣𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘵:

𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘯𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘸𝘦 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘣𝘦𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘥?

𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘯 𝘪𝘯𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘵—

𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘨𝘦,

𝘰𝘳 𝘰𝘯𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘧𝘦𝘢𝘳?

𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴.

𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘯𝘴.

𝘍𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘮𝘢𝘯.

𝘍𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘸𝘰𝘮𝘢𝘯.

𝘍𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘰𝘯 𝘸𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘪𝘳 𝘷𝘰𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘴.𝘐𝘵 𝘥𝘰𝘦𝘴.𝘐𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘩𝘢𝘴.

𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘷𝘰𝘪𝘤𝘦𝘴 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘵𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳,

𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘨𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘴𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘥—𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦,

𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘦,𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦.

𝘚𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥.

𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘢𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘦,𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘶𝘳𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘦.

𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘥𝘪𝘷𝘪𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘳𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘳 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘺,

𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘦.

𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘺 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘤𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘻𝘦𝘯𝘴,

𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘦𝘥, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦𝘥, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘪𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘥.

𝘓𝘦𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘷𝘰𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘤𝘢𝘳𝘳𝘺—𝘪𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘩𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴,

𝘪𝘯 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴,

𝘪𝘯 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘱𝘢𝘤𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘩 𝘮𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘣𝘦 𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘬𝘦𝘯.

𝘓𝘦𝘵 𝘺𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳

𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘶𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱,

𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘨𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘭.

𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦𝘨 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘳𝘯𝘦𝘴𝘴.

𝘞𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵 𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘵.

𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥—

𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘦𝘳, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘷𝘪𝘭𝘭𝘢𝘨𝘦, 𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘦𝘦𝘵—𝘸𝘢𝘴 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘴𝘢𝘤𝘳𝘪𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦.

𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘦 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘤𝘺

𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘸𝘦𝘢𝘬𝘦𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘣𝘺 𝘧𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘨𝘰𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘯 𝘣𝘺 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦.

𝘐𝘧 𝘩𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘵𝘴𝘦𝘭𝘧,

𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘯 𝘭𝘦𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘧𝘪𝘯𝘥 𝘶𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺.

𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘥.𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘱𝘦𝘢𝘬.

𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘤𝘵—𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘤𝘭𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘵𝘺, 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘷𝘦.

𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘳𝘺.𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘮𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵.

𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰𝘨𝘦𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳—𝘸𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦 𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘪𝘯.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦—

The Price of Silence, What Changed at Kaieteur News?

/in /by

𝗔 𝗳𝗼𝗹𝗹𝗼𝘄-𝘂𝗽 𝘁𝗼 𝗛𝗼𝘄 𝗮 𝗙𝗶𝗲𝗿𝗰𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰 𝗪𝗮𝘀 𝗧𝗮𝗺𝗲𝗱 —𝗻𝗲𝘄 𝗾𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗿𝗻𝘀 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗲𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗼𝗿𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗶𝘁𝘆, 𝗽𝗼𝘄𝗲𝗿, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗹𝗶𝗲 𝗯𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲
𝘀𝗶𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲
𝘚𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦, 𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘦𝘥, 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘴 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘵𝘰 𝘪𝘨𝘯𝘰𝘳𝘦.
In our previous publication, we examined what appeared to be a quiet but consequential shift at Kaieteur News—a movement away from its historically defiant posture into something more measured, more selective, and, to some observers, more accommodating.
Since then, the response has not come in the form of clear rebuttals or transparent explanations. Instead, it has arrived in fragments—private outreach, careful distancing, and a noticeable discomfort with the questions themselves.
That, in itself, is revealing.
Because if nothing has changed, there should be nothing to explain.
Yet the pattern persists.
Critical submissions continue to face an invisible filter. “ Letters and Op-Ed’s” that once would have led the charge now struggle to find daylight. At the same time, issues of national consequence—such as the brutal murder of Sayieed Baksh—have failed to generate the sustained attention one would expect from institutions that once prided themselves on pursuing truth without fear or favor.
𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘐𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘯 𝘰𝘣𝘴𝘦𝘳𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯.
𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘵 𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯: 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘴—𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘹𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘢𝘭—𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘱𝘦 𝘸𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘦𝘦?
Increasingly, attention has turned to the intersection of editorial behavior and access to privilege.
There is growing public curiosity about allocations of prime lands along the East Bank Heroes Highway corridor and in Palmyra, Berbice— transactions that, while not unlawful on their face, demand transparency given the stature of those involved and the timing within which they occurred. In any healthy democracy, such matters would invite scrutiny, not silence.
So why the silence?
Is it coincidence that a period marked by editorial restraint aligns with whispers of increased proximity to state-linked opportunities? Or is Guyana witnessing a more sophisticated evolution of influence—one where pressure is no longer applied outwardly, but absorbed quietly through access and accommodation?
At the same time, another layer of concern has begun to surface.
Sources with knowledge of ongoing inquiries—speaking cautiously and within clear limits—have alluded to financial movements that extend beyond Guyana’s jurisdiction. References to accounts in Miami, and to transactions involving individuals connected to officialdom, have begun to circulate with increasing frequency.
No formal findings have been made public. No conclusions are asserted here.
But the questions are no longer isolated.
They are converging.
And within those questions, one curious line has emerged—repeated just often enough to invite scrutiny, but never fully explained.
“𝘊𝘩𝘰𝘤𝘰𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘦.? 𝘖𝘳 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘺?”
What exactly does it represent? A harmless indulgence? A coded reference? Or simply a convenient retort in a conversation that prefers not to speak plainly?
We do not speculate. But we do take note.
Because when editorial silence, privileged access, and unexplained financial references begin to occupy the same space—even loosely—the burden shifts.
Not to those asking the questions.
But to those in a position to answer them.
𝘒𝘢𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘶𝘳 𝘕𝘦𝘸𝘴 𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘵 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘱𝘶𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘰𝘯 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳, 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘪𝘵. 𝘛𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘭𝘦𝘨𝘢𝘤𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘦𝘢𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥—𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘪𝘵 𝘤𝘢𝘯 𝘣𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘪𝘦𝘵𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘸𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘵𝘦𝘯.
And if there is a reasonable explanation for what the public is now witnessing, then it should be offered—clearly, directly, and without evasion.
𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘴𝘪𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘴𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘭𝘰𝘶𝘥𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 𝘸𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘦𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘦.
𝘈𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦, 𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘴.
𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘺 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘢𝘶𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘰𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘵𝘤𝘩𝘥𝘰𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘢𝘳𝘬.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦—

Fastest Growing, Fundamentally Fragile

/in /by

𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙜𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩’𝙨 𝙡𝙖𝙩𝙚𝙨𝙩 𝙖𝙩𝙩𝙚𝙢𝙥𝙩 𝙩𝙤 𝙘𝙖𝙣𝙤𝙣𝙞𝙯𝙚 𝙞𝙩𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙛 𝙖𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙘𝙝𝙞𝙩𝙚𝙘𝙩 𝙤𝙛 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖’𝙨 𝙚𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙤𝙢𝙞𝙘 𝙢𝙞𝙧𝙖𝙘𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙗𝙚 𝙖𝙢𝙪𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙜—𝙞𝙛 𝙞𝙩 𝙬𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙣’𝙩 𝙨𝙤 𝙙𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙧𝙤𝙪𝙨𝙡𝙮 𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜.
Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh wants the country to believe that today’s oil-fuelled boom is the natural and inevitable result of decades of PPP/C foresight, discipline, and economic genius. It is a neat story. Convenient. Self-serving.
And largely incomplete.
Yes, Guyana is now the world’s fastest-growing economy. That much is undeniable. But what the government refuses to confront—what it deliberately sidesteps—is the uncomfortable truth buried within the very reports it proudly cites.

The IMF, World Bank, and Inter-American Development Bank are not in the business of political flattery. And their assessments tell a far less triumphant story.
Strip away the oil, and what remains?
A fragile, under-diversified economy.
Weak institutional capacity.
Chronic implementation failures.
And a public sector struggling to keep pace with the very growth it celebrates.

The World Bank has warned, repeatedly, that Guyana’s non-oil economy lacks resilience. The IDB has flagged glaring deficiencies in governance, procurement, and project execution. These are not minor technical footnotes—they are structural red flags.
Yet, instead of addressing these realities with urgency and transparency, the government wraps itself in GDP statistics and calls it transformation.

This is not transformation. This is statistical intoxication.
Because while the numbers soar, ordinary Guyanese are left to navigate a very different reality: escalating living costs, chaotic infrastructure, overwhelmed health systems, and an education sector ill-prepared for the demands of a modern economy.

Where, exactly, is this prosperity being felt?
Certainly not evenly. And certainly not fairly.The administration’s narrative also leans heavily on historical revisionism—suggesting that today’s success is the direct outcome of policy decisions stretching back to 1992. But let’s be clear: Guyana’s current economic explosion is overwhelmingly driven by oil.
𝙊𝙞𝙡 𝙧𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙪𝙚𝙨. 𝙊𝙞𝙡 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙙𝙪𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣. 𝙊𝙞𝙡 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙨.
𝙉𝙤𝙩 𝙖𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙪𝙡𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙖𝙡 𝙙𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙞𝙛𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣.
𝙉𝙤𝙩 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙪𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙨𝙞𝙤𝙣.
𝙉𝙤𝙩 𝙞𝙣𝙣𝙤𝙫𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣-𝙡𝙚𝙙 𝙜𝙧𝙤𝙬𝙩𝙝.
𝙏𝙤 𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙙 𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙬𝙞𝙨𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙟𝙪𝙨𝙩 𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜—𝙞𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙞𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙙𝙞𝙨𝙝𝙤𝙣𝙚𝙨𝙩.
𝙄𝙣𝙫𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙧 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙛𝙞𝙙𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚, 𝙩𝙤𝙤, 𝙞𝙨 𝙗𝙚𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙞𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙡𝙮 𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙧𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙚𝙧𝙞𝙯𝙚𝙙.
𝙄𝙣𝙫𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙧𝙨 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙛𝙡𝙤𝙘𝙠𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙤 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝙗𝙚𝙘𝙖𝙪𝙨𝙚 𝙤𝙛 𝙥𝙧𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙚 𝙜𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙖𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙤𝙧 𝙞𝙣𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙩𝙪𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙚𝙭𝙘𝙚𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚. 𝙏𝙝𝙚𝙮 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙗𝙚𝙘𝙖𝙪𝙨𝙚 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝙨𝙞𝙩𝙨 𝙖𝙩𝙤𝙥 𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙡𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙨 𝙤𝙛 𝙗𝙖𝙧𝙧𝙚𝙡𝙨 𝙤𝙛 𝙤𝙞𝙡.
𝙃𝙞𝙜𝙝 𝙧𝙚𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙣𝙨 𝙖𝙩𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙘𝙩 𝙘𝙖𝙥𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙡. 𝙏𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙖 𝙜𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙣𝙖𝙣𝙘𝙚 𝙚𝙣𝙙𝙤𝙧𝙨𝙚𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩—𝙞𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙢𝙖𝙧𝙠𝙚𝙩 𝙡𝙤𝙜𝙞𝙘.

And herein lies the danger.
Because what happens when oil prices dip? When reserves decline? When global energy transitions accelerate?
What remains of this so-called “transformation”?
The IDB has already issued the warning: without stronger institutions, greater transparency, and disciplined management of public resources, Guyana risks squandering a once-in-a-generation opportunity.
That is not opposition rhetoric. That is expert assessment.
But instead of confronting these risks, the government continues to peddle a narrative of perfection—one where past leadership is beyond reproach and present challenges are conveniently ignored.

This is not leadership. This is deflection.
Guyana does not need mythology. It needs honesty.
It needs leaders who understand that growth without equity is hollow. That wealth without systems is unstable.
𝙏𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙜𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙨 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙩 𝙖𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙞𝙨 𝙪𝙣𝙨𝙪𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 𝙩𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 𝙞𝙨 𝙨𝙞𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙚, 𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙣 𝙞𝙛 𝙞𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙥𝙤𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙞𝙚𝙣𝙩:
𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝙞𝙨 𝙧𝙞𝙘𝙝—𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙮𝙚𝙩 𝙬𝙚𝙡𝙡-𝙙𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙡𝙤𝙥𝙚𝙙.
𝙂𝙧𝙤𝙬𝙞𝙣𝙜—𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙮𝙚𝙩 𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚.
𝙋𝙧𝙤𝙢𝙞𝙨𝙞𝙣𝙜—𝙗𝙪𝙩 𝙙𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚𝙧𝙤𝙪𝙨𝙡𝙮 𝙪𝙣𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙚𝙙.
𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝙣𝙤 𝙖𝙢𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩 𝙤𝙛 𝙥𝙤𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙞𝙘𝙖𝙡 𝙨𝙚𝙡𝙛-𝙘𝙤𝙣𝙜𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙪𝙡𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙣𝙜𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮.
𝙁𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙨 𝙙𝙤 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙗𝙚𝙣𝙙 𝙩𝙤 𝙣𝙖𝙧𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.
𝙀𝙫𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙪𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮, 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙮 𝙙𝙚𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙧𝙚𝙘𝙠𝙤𝙣𝙞𝙣𝙜
𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦

𝐀𝐈, 𝐎𝐢𝐥 𝐖𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐡, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐚𝐧𝐮𝐟𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐒𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐧 𝐆𝐮𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐚

/in /by

𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝘀𝗹𝗲𝗲𝗽𝘄𝗮𝗹𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹—𝘄𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗼𝗹𝗶𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘁
Billions in oil revenues are flowing into state coffers at an unprecedented pace. Yet, for all this wealth, the structural realities remain deeply troubling: youth unemployment is persistently high, public healthcare and education systems are uneven at best, and procurement controversies continue to shadow major projects.
The uncomfortable truth is this—economic expansion is not translating into broad-based empowerment.
𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘄, 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗲𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝗽𝗼𝗶𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗲 𝗴𝗹𝗼𝗯𝗮𝗹 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗮𝗿𝗸𝗲𝘁𝘀, 𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸𝘀 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗻𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝗶𝗺𝗯𝗮𝗹𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗮𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿.

𝗢𝗶𝗹 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗮𝗹𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆 𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝗯𝗲𝘁𝘄𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝘁𝘀 𝗰𝗶𝘁𝗶𝘇𝗲𝗻𝘀.
Today, the government is increasingly financed not by the productive output of its people, but by resource rents generated offshore. This matters. When a state does not depend on its citizens for revenue, it has fewer incentives to be transparent, efficient, or accountable. Taxation historically forced negotiation. Oil revenues bypass it.

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗻𝗲𝗴𝗼𝘁𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝗻 𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮? 𝗖𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘇𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗗𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗿𝗲𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻. 𝗔𝗻𝗱, 𝘁𝗼𝗼 𝗼𝗳𝘁𝗲𝗻, 𝗼𝗽𝗮𝗰𝗶𝘁𝘆.
The Natural Resource Fund, heralded as a mechanism for safeguarding national wealth, remains a point of contention, with repeated concerns about withdrawals, oversight, and political control. Major infrastructure contracts continue to raise questions about transparency and value for money. Meanwhile, citizens—whose patrimony is being extracted at scale—are largely spectators to decisions that will define their economic future.
𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗶𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹. 𝗜𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗹.

𝗔𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗜 𝘁𝗵𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗱𝗲𝗲𝗽𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝘁.
As artificial intelligence and automation reduce the need for human labor across sectors, the economic relevance of the average worker will decline further. In Guyana, where oil already dominates and diversification remains more rhetorical than real, this could entrench a model where wealth is generated with minimal participation from the population.
𝗔 𝘀𝗺𝗮𝗹𝗹 𝗰𝗶𝗿𝗰𝗹𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀—𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹𝘀, 𝗽𝗼𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗯𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗰𝗼𝗿𝗽𝗼𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀—𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗵𝗲𝗶𝗴𝗵𝘁𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗼𝗶𝗹 𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝘆 𝗔𝗜-𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗿𝗴𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝘁.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘁? 𝗜𝗻𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗻𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘀 𝗼𝗳 𝘄𝗲𝗮𝗹𝘁𝗵.
This is how accountability erodes—not through the removal of elections, but through the quiet stripping of their economic meaning.
A population that is not central to production has less leverage. A government that does not need broad-based taxation feels less pressure to justify its decisions. And a political system awash in rents can sustain inefficiency, patronage, and selective development far longer than a tax-dependent one ever could.

𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮 𝗶𝘀 𝗮𝗹𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘆 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘄𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗲 𝘀𝘆𝗺𝗽𝘁𝗼𝗺𝘀.
Despite record revenues, there is no commensurate urgency in transforming education to prepare citizens for a technologically disrupted future. No clear national strategy to ensure that AI and digital transformation create opportunities rather than deepen exclusion. No robust, independent enforcement architecture that consistently reassures citizens that public funds are being managed with integrity.

𝗜𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗱, 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗮 𝗳𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗿 𝗽𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗻: 𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗰𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆, 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘀𝗰𝗿𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗻𝘆, 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗴𝗿𝗼𝘄𝘁𝗵 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝗰𝗹𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗼𝗻.
𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘆𝗯𝗼𝗼𝗸—𝘂𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗮𝗹𝗴𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗵𝗺𝘀.
If left unchecked, Guyana could become a country where wealth expands on paper while citizen power contracts in reality. A nation rich in resources, but poor in accountability. A democracy in form, but increasingly hollow in function.

𝗧𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝘂𝘁𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘃𝗶𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲—𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝗳𝗮𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗽𝗹𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗹𝗲.
Reversing course will require more than policy tweaks. It demands a fundamental shift in governance: enforceable transparency in the Natural Resource Fund, truly independent procurement oversight, aggressive investment in human capital, and a clear framework to ensure that emerging technologies serve the many—not the few.

𝗕𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗸𝗲𝘀 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗻𝗼 𝗹𝗼𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗻𝗼𝗺𝗶𝗰.
𝗧𝗵𝗲𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗱𝗲𝗺𝗼𝗰𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗰.
And if Guyana fails to confront this moment with honesty and urgency, we may soon discover that the greatest risk of our oil wealth—and our AI future—is not that it leaves us behind, but that it leaves most of us out.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.

𝐒𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐲𝐩𝐨𝐜𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐮𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐚’𝐬 𝐅𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐢𝐠𝐧 𝐏𝐨𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠

/in /by
𝐁𝐘: 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐟𝐟-𝐖𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐫
𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝟓𝟗𝟐 𝐆𝐔𝐀𝐑𝐃𝐈𝐀𝐍
Guyana’s Minister of Local Government, Priya Manickchand, has launched a scathing attack on CARICOM leaders for engaging Venezuelan official Delcy Rodríguez while she sported a brooch depicting the Essequibo as Venezuelan territory. Her outrage, framed around the sanctity of sovereignty and principle, is—on the surface—understandable. But it is also transparently selective, and that very selectivity strips her position of any remaining moral authority.
Minister Manickchand correctly declared that “principle shouldn’t be convenient.” Yet, convenience has become the hallmark of this administration’s foreign policy. For decades, Cuba stood as a pillar of support for Guyana, providing critical medical expertise that our system relied upon. When the United States exerted pressure, Guyana turned its back on Havana, quietly terminating the Cuban Medical Brigade programme. Where was the public outcry regarding sovereignty and loyalty then? Apparently, principle only applies when it aligns with Washington’s current geopolitical push.
This duplicity is echoed in the recent missive from President Irfaan Ali to the CARICOM Chairman, in which he essentially demands that regional partners calibrate their bilateral engagements to suit Guyana’s sensitivities. It is a bold, if not arrogant, demand for a government that has remained notably silent when other CARICOM nations were being penalized by external powers for failing to fall in line with US interests.
To demand unwavering solidarity from one’s neighbours while exercising cold, opportunistic flexibility at home is a contradiction that does not go unnoticed in regional capitals.
CARICOM is a community of sovereign nations, not an extension of Georgetown’s foreign policy apparatus. Small island states, having navigated years of energy dependency through Petro-diplomacy, are being lectured by an administration that chose to align with Trinidad and Tobago—and by extension, Washington—at the expense of regional cohesion.
The hypocrisy is even more glaring when one looks inward. The government insists that the world must respect Guyana’s sovereignty, yet it refuses to practice that same respect within our own borders. The Attorney General and the President have actively shunned the Leader of the Opposition, denying him a seat at the table to be properly apprised of the upcoming ICJ proceedings. If this administration cannot be bothered to build a unified national front at home, it has no business demanding that CARICOM leaders carry that burden for them abroad.
Sovereignty is not merely a slogan to be brandished at regional summits; it is a responsibility upheld through transparency and inclusion. By excluding domestic stakeholders, the government weakens the very cause it seeks to defend.
Venezuela’s provocative use of symbols is an attempt to project authority where it has none, and it certainly warrants objection. But let us be clear: this is not a loyalty test that Guyana is qualified to administer. You cannot outsource your own integrity.
President Ali and Minister Manickchand are currently posturing as defenders of the realm, yet their actions border on the very bullyism they claim to oppose. They demand from our neighbours a standard they refuse to hold themselves to, assuming that CARICOM will act as a subservient instrument of their selective outrage. They are mistaken.
Diplomacy in the Caribbean is a complex balancing act, and if Guyana wishes to command genuine support, it must stop demanding compliance and start leading with consistency.
𝙎𝙤𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙞𝙜𝙣𝙩𝙮 𝙗𝙚𝙜𝙞𝙣𝙨 𝙖𝙩 𝙝𝙤𝙢𝙚. 𝙄𝙛 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙘𝙖𝙣𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙧𝙚𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙞𝙩 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙤𝙬𝙣 𝙗𝙤𝙧𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨, 𝙙𝙤 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙚𝙭𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩 𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙩𝙤 𝙙𝙤 𝙞𝙩 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙮𝙤𝙪 𝙤𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙬𝙤𝙧𝙡𝙙 𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙜𝙚.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣 — 𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.

𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬. 𝐀𝐥𝐢 -𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐏𝐏𝐏 𝐦𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫, 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫 – 𝐚 𝐛𝐫𝐨𝐨𝐜𝐡

/in /by

𝐁𝐘: 𝐆𝐇𝐊 𝐋𝐀𝐋𝐋

My thinking was that Irfaan Ali, Guyana’s PhD president needed urgent help to make better use of his time. Searching for, locating, and dealing with the best people would assist him to prioritize, leave a lasting impression, eventually. I prefer being wrong; a president is involved. He jumped out; proved me right. About time mismanagement. A brooch, Dr. President? Is somebody kidding? Of all the matters crying for immediate attention, a brooch worn by America’s Venezuelan presidential plant with Essequibo ingrained, is what sends Excellency Ali off, drives him to get in the face of CARICOM leaders? Knock me down; let me stay down there, please. It’s better to be at the bottom than have to deal with this type of, ah (er), genius now so popular in modern Guyana. Worth saying again, however painful: new PhDs lack past profoundness.
Former Venezuelan caudillo, Nicolo Maduro Doro, repeatedly called Guyana’s Irfaan Ali an imperialist stooge, and his PPP Govt an American puppet. Shades of the PPP’s newest, closest friends, the Red Chinese. Neither he nor anybody in the PPP could generate a halfway hearty riposte. But Irfaan Ali is up the wall and going to the mat on some brooch. Of course, it is the symbolism, the bold-faced testing of the waters in the Venezuelan leader’s appalling audacity and arrogance. Aside: unless Americans put her up to that, so they can rush to Guyana’s side, emphasize the special friendship between the US-Guyana. America controls Guyana, dangles its leaders on a string. America suspends Venezuelan leaders by their neckties, and they still delight in sticking their tongues at GT and the PPP.
Now Pres Ali is on fire and he runs to some CARICOM leaders with sharp protests to convey his displeasure. He, a president, was labeled “insolent” by the now jailed onetime Venezuelan badman, and what did Excellency Ali do? He settled for silence as his trusted companion. Clearly, there is some difficulty within PPP Govt camps in figuring out how to keep Pres. Ali focused, and maximizing returns from his scarce time. It was he himself who said in his first year, that he’s a busy man, with a million matters managed all at once. But he is so sharp-eyed, and brilliantly advised, that he zeroes in a brooch and makes a big stink about it.
Venezuelan agents violate borders, shoot Guyanese soldiers, sack local communities, haul away spoils. The best that PPP Govt headmen have to offer is soft words, softer sticks, and the softest footsteps. But a miniscule, miserable, and maggot-like brooch is made into this monstrous apparition and existential concern. Is this PPP Govt a comedy or an effigy? When I first read of Senora Delcy Rodriguez’s daring foreign adventure, while armed with a brooch, my reaction was if that is how she gets an adrenalin rush, then the gracious lady is best given wide berth, left to her antics. Civilized Guyanese know that’s exactly how one responds on encountering certain citizens on the street. People talking to themselves. People dressed in gaudy costumes, with bizarre ornaments completing intriguing dress codes.
Because I know how PPP leadership thinks, Dr. Ali’s firefight over a fly is taking a sledgehammer to a snail. Much ado about the rambunctious and frivolous. At bottom, it is the PPP Govt’s (and leadership) patented pattern of deflection. Distracting from the ruff stuff, covering up the tuff stuff. Like that US$2 billion gas project bacchanal. Pres Ali has studiously avoided addressing the gaping exposés in that energy masquerade, and in Delcy Rodriguez’s brooch he found the perfect distraction for gullible Guyanese. Recall the four-step recovery program developed by the PPP. Distort first. When that fails, deflect. Should that drop dead, then deny. And when all of those fall apart, then seek and destroy the messengers. Ali sealed his lips on the US$2 billion bag of tricks. Delcy Rodriguez’s brooch pulled his lips apart.
𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣-𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮,𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨.— ✦