The government and its double standards

May 15, 2017 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

The government is not being consistent at all when it comes to the administrative procedures involved in investigating corruption. It is applying one set of rules for one set of people and another set of rules for another set of persons.
A few weeks ago, the police were called in to investigate an alleged fraud at a city bank. A person involved in the gold industry was accused of having defrauded the bank. The matter is before the courts.
The person happens to be a gold miner and therefore all his activities logically came under scrutiny because of the scale of the alleged fraud.
As part of the wider investigation, top officials of the Guyana Gold Board were sent on administrative leave so as to facilitate an investigation into the gold sales of the person accused of the alleged fraud at the bank. The investigation was purportedly to establish the source of the production of the gold.
It was explained by the head of the Guyana Gold Board that the Gold Board is required to buy all the gold which is offered for sale to the Board. The Gold Board, it was further explained, is not responsible for monitoring the production of gold produced. This, we are told, is the responsibility of the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission.
Yet no one from the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission was sent home on administrative leave in relation to this matter. Double standards?
We are also told that the son of the former President of Guyana was also sent on leave in order for the Guyana Water Inc. to investigate a computer malware infecting the computer systems at that entity.
Why would you have to send home somebody for this, when computers are infected all the time by computer malware?
In fact the computer system of the health system in the United Kingdom crashed this week because of a cyber attack. Computers all over the world were affected. We will have to await the outcome of the investigation into that incident.
On the other hand, there have been reports of investigations being launched at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Youth and Sports into alleged financial transactions.
Wrongdoing has been denied by one of the parties whose name was mentioned. Wrongdoing was also, you will recall, denied in relation to the investigation at the Guyana Gold Board. Despite this, the head of the Guyana Gold Board was sent on administrative leave, but no similar action has been taken in relation to the investigation at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Youth and Sports.
Why was it not felt necessary to send anyone on administrative leave in relation to that investigation? Is it because of political party connections? A person is assumed innocent until proven guilty.
Sending someone home on administrative leave is not suggesting guilt. It is merely a measure to ensure that there is no possibility of interfering with the investigation.
But how is it that some persons are being sent home so as to remove any possibility of interfering with investigations, while others are not given the same treatment.
The government is not being consistent. The government is adopting double standards in relation to these investigations. It has also refused to launch a Commission of Inquiry into the allegations of the abuse of prescription narcotics in Region 5.
It is for reasons such as this that the government is being accused of being selective in its actions. In the meantime, those sent on leave are not certain if they will return to their jobs, even if they are exonerated.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News