Opposition parties cite lack of consultation in President’s COI of MV Barima tragedy

Jul 26, 2026 News

---

…want IMO investigation conducted alongside COI

(Kaieteur News) – Opposition parties, We Invest in Nationhood (WIN), A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), the Forward Guyana Movement (FGM), the Alliance For Change (AFC), and the Vigilant Political Action Committee (VPAC), on Saturday evening highlighted the lack of consultation by the government of Guyana with the parliamentary opposition in establishing a Commission of Inquiry into the tragic MV Barima boat incident.

The capsizing of the vessel one week ago resulted in the death of at least 73 persons while 76 persons survived the horrific maritime disaster.

The opposition parties acknowledged the announcement by President Irfaan Ali on Saturday that a five-member independent body will be announced on Sunday to assess the circumstances surrounding the incident.

WIN, APNU, FGM, AFC and VPAC all however expressed “deep disappointment” in the lack of consultation with the parliamentary opposition or other key national stakeholders regarding the composition of the Commission.

In a joint statement, the parties said, “A tragedy of this magnitude demands a process that inspires confidence across the political and social spectrum. Inclusive consultation would have strengthened the credibility and legitimacy of the inquiry from its inception.”

Further, the group noted that timing of the announcement, made immediately before the National Assembly is due to debate opposition motions on the MV Barima tragedy on Monday.

The parties were adamant that the establishment of the Commission cannot replace Parliament’s constitutional responsibility to examine matters of national importance or the executive’s obligation to answer to the people’s elected representatives.

Further, they argued that the Commission of Inquiry is not a substitute for an independent marine safety investigation conducted in accordance with internationally recognized standards. As such, the parties suggested, “As a member of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), Guyana should undertake a technical marine casualty investigation consistent with the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), the IMO Casualty Investigation Code, and the IMO Model Regulations on Domestic Ferry Safety.”

They argued that a Commission of Inquiry and a marine safety investigation serve different but complementary purposes. While the Commission examines matters of governance, public administration, and accountability, a marine safety investigation is a specialized technical investigation undertaken by a multidisciplinary team that may include accident investigators, master mariners, naval architects, marine engineers, vessel stability experts, human factors specialists, emergency response experts, marine operations specialists, and any other technical experts required by the evidence. Its purpose is to determine how and why the casualty occurred, identify safety deficiencies, and recommend measures to prevent future tragedies. It is not intended to apportion blame or determine civil or criminal liability.

Additionally, the joint opposition stated that the Commission’s mandate must extend beyond operational issues to examine ministerial oversight, regulatory enforcement, administrative decision-making, emergency preparedness, resource allocation, and any systemic failures within government that may have contributed to this tragedy.

“No office or public official should be beyond scrutiny where the evidence warrants examination,” according to the group.

They also raised concerns about the appointment of the Secretary to the Commission of Inquiry, recognising that public confidence depends not only on the independence of the Commissioners but also on the integrity and impartiality of the Commission’s administration.

The parties pointed out that the secretary plays a critical role in managing evidence, records, witnesses, and the day-to-day administration of the inquiry and must therefore be free from any actual or perceived conflict of interest.

They added, “Similarly, the Commission’s procedures must encourage, not discourage, public participation. Every person with relevant information should have a fair and unhindered opportunity to provide evidence, and every relevant document should be capable of being placed before the Commission.”

The opposition parties called for a transparent, accessible investigation that inspires public confidence.

The group further recommended, “consistent with the principles of ministerial accountability under the Westminster system of government, we reiterate our call for Minister Juan Edghill and Minister Deodat Indar to resign or, at the very least, proceed on leave pending the completion of the inquiry.”

The parties believe that their continued oversight of ministries whose actions may become the subject of investigation risks undermining public confidence in the independence of the process.

---

• A Partnership For National Unity, COI, MV Barima tragedy, We Invest in Nationhood

---