Latest update August 30th, 2026 10:02 AM
Reports have always been a source of discomfort in Guyana
Dear Editor,
Reports have always been a source of discomfort in a Guyana context, particularly as it relates to those that unfairly seek to shed Guyana in a bad light. Many of such can come to mind.
What bothers me though is the selectiveness of some when using particular reports to arrive at possible conclusions in an attempt to shed bad light on the government of the day or its policies and programmes.
When reading the 2009 US Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, two particular excerpts come to mind:
1. “A major personnel transition within the Customs Anti-Narcotics Unit (CANU) offers some promise of improved coordination and interdiction efforts.”
2. “Policy Initiatives. The GOG undertook a major overhaul of its chief counternarcotics body (CANU). Nine of its officers were fired in May, including the Acting Head, after failing polygraph examinations. In October, a new Director of CANU was hired, and the replacement of recently dismissed officers was ongoing at year’s end. CANU’s new Director has promised regularization of its operations, improved efficiency, and enhanced collaboration among law-enforcement bodies.”
When moves were being made to effect such changes via polygraph testing it resulted in a big hue and cry by the main Opposition, as well as so-called ‘civil society’ proponents, something that we have gotten quite accustomed to. Lo and behold the 2009 US Drug report has described it as offering “some promise of improved coordination and interdiction efforts”, and our ears and eyes are not bombarded by the usual shouts of the detractors and their cronies in the media. Why? Could you have imagined the outcry, had this report said the opposite?
Jason Abdulla
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.