TIGI is pushing the agenda of transparency, accountability and anti-corruption

Jun 19, 2019 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,

Mr. Donald Singh’s letter captioned “It should be clear to the public that TIGI is now pushing an agenda” was published on June 16, 2019. Mr. Singh indicates in the letter that the agenda is “political and legal advocacy”. There is nothing striking about this assertion except for the insinuation that this is new and except possibly for some other undertone that I might have overlooked.
Though I cannot vouch for fully understanding what Mr. Singh means by “political and legal advocacy” it is clear that he believes that we are doing something other than what we should be doing. In his words, we should be “simply calling for greater transparency”. Let me confirm that TIGI is and has been pushing an agenda of transparency, accountability and anti-corruption and everything associated therewith.
Accountability is sometimes more challenging to understand. It is that function whereby we call things as they are and push for redress where applicable. I summarise it (somewhat unsatisfactorily) as ensuring that the rules are followed, that relevant sanctions are applied for infringements and that appropriate adjustments are made when there are violations. It is by upholding accountability and ending impunity that we will make the greatest inroads in the fight against corruption and poor governance and it matters not which entities or personalities are involved.
Our columns on the oil contract(s) address the issues based on the evidence, which we provided for the reader’s assessment. We naturally anticipated that which Mr. Singh advances as the most basic counterargument that will be made. The rhetorical question of why we have not moved to the courts is pertinent but let it suffice to know that this is due thus far to issues external to the merits of the case.
Mr. Singh is wrong in suggesting that TIGI should be “simply calling for greater transparency”. This is inconsistent with our watchdog status and on the basis of this misconception, it is appropriate to set aside his insinuation that we are veering away from what we should be doing. Addressing the issues in the oil contract(s) fits squarely into what we should be doing as an organisation.
TIGI’s functions encompass raising public awareness about important matters. The columns on the oil contract(s) and indeed all of our columns and statements on the topics we have addressed over time are as much about public education, awareness, and advocating for improvements as promoting transparency, accountability and anti-corruption. We have advocated for, for example, political financing legislation and I have said publicly that I will not vote for any party that either does not support or does not want to implement such legislation. We have supported prosecution of former and current ministers of government embroiled in accusations of misconduct in public office and have in recent times called for investigations and appropriate action to be taken against those who violate the laws of Guyana in executing their public duties. I personally raised a court case (with the support of the TIGI’s directors) on depositing the signing bonus from ExxonMobil into the Consolidated Fund. We have therefore been engaging in both political and legal advocacy and this nullifies any perceived novelty in Mr. Singh’s assertion that TIGI’s columns veer into political or legal advocacy.
If someone is motivated by our columns to take the illegalities that we identify in the contract(s) to court or to initiate any other actions to seek rectification, this would be an achievement in our advocacy and it would be much better than TIGI taking the matter to court itself. There should be no mystery about and no mistaking our intention in relation to the columns on the oil contract(s). We are saying that something is wrong and that it needs to be rectified.

Troy Thomas, Ph.D.
President, TIGI

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News