Latest update June 4th, 2026 12:30 AM
Dr. Bulkan debunks Baishanlin’s claim against govt.
Dear Editor,
In relation to the threat by Bai Shan Lin against the Government of Guyana reported by Demerara Waves (see ‘Bai Shan Lin wants GRA to release seized vehicles; UN Chief written over dispute’, http://wp.me/p74HcF-4A9) , my reading of the ‘Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Guyana and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on the promotion and protection of investments’ (signed on 27 March 2003) is that Bai Shan Lin has absolutely no claim against Guyana for actions against its numerous illegalities and defaults. On another matter – if there is no FDI document for Bai Shan Lin, how could there be fiscal concessions for more than ten years?
Minister with some responsibility for the Natural Resources Sector, Raphael Trotman, and Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, allegedly said that they could not find the documents covering the foreign direct incentive (FDI) tax concessions awarded by the PPP/C regime a decade ago to the Chinese transnational logger Bai Shan Lin (‘Concessions granted under PPP must be renegotiated – Govt. Official’, Kaieteur News 18 January 2016). The Ministry of Finance has been awarding tax concessions to BSL annually during this decade, and publishing the amounts from time to time in the Guyana Chronicle. So some person or unit in the Ministry of Finance must be aware of the legal authority for such dispensation. If the currently chaotic Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) and Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) are unable to deal with this simple case, no doubt our Attorney General, Basil Williams, has reminded the Cabinet that the National Assembly itself can take action?
‘Where it appears to a legislative body that anyone within Guyana is able to give any information with respect to the subject matter of any question arising for its determination or has any books, plans, or documents in his possession or under his control in any way relating to the subject matter of that question, that body may cause a summons to be issued to the person . . . requiring the person to be and appear before the legislative body . . . for the purpose of being examined (and, if so required, then and there to produce the books, plans, or documents mentioned in the summons . . .’ (section 3 (1) in the Legislative Bodies (Evidence) Act (cap. 1:08, 1880/1977)). This Act goes on to prescribe penalties for failing to appear when summoned and for failing to produce the documents.
Thus the National Assembly can compel evidence from the Ministries, Bai Shan Lin itself and from the innermost recesses of the PPP/C. We look forward to immediate action by the National Assembly, given that Bai Shan Lin has been receiving more than US$ 40 million income annually from its sales of unprocessed timber logs, entirely contrary to approved national policies and the manifestos of the main political parties since 2006, plus those investment incentives, but has failed to construct even the foundations for its long promised US$70 million wood processing facility.
And don’t forget the sales of steel imported duty free by BSL and then sold on to the private sector instead of being used for construction of the BSL wood processing facility.
Janette Bulkan
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.