Public record vs. public knowledge

Aug 08, 2013 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,
It is with much concern that I have read of the involvement of Mr. Nigel Hughes in the company that will be managing the Amaila Falls Hydro Electric Project.
In recent years, the project has been one heavily debated and reported on in the press. Mr Hughes’ party, the Alliance For Change, has been criticizing the project and raising concerns over aspects of it including costs.
At no point in time was it revealed publicly that Mr Hughes was the Secretary. He rightfully said that his involvement in the company as Secretary was a matter of public record. Under the laws, companies are mandated to file details of the names of its principals at the registry. It then becomes public record.
However, there is a distinction here about what is public record and public knowledge. Nobody knew.
The second thing is that the AFC, according to Hughes, knew all along. Any responsible party would have known the implications of not publicly declaring this. It is irrelevant whether Mr Hughes has distanced or recused himself from the party’s deliberations on Amaila.
So then, the question to be asked is why the big secrecy by AFC and Mr Hughes on the role he played in the project and would he disclose how much he is being paid?
Secondly, is there any other public project that Mr Hughes is involved in at this time? And is he also being paid?
Mr Hughes, as a prominent lawyer and respected individual who was seen by many as a breath of fresh air, owes this nation some additional answers.
Cobeer Persaud

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News