Dear Editor,
Permit me to try and kill ‘two birds with one stone’ in this letter. First, I have applauded the general sentiment, as reported elsewhere, that President Irfaan Ali’s recently suggested that government bonds will be made available for overseas-based Guyanese to become investors in Guyana. The general concept is way overdue given that foreigners are marching into Guyana, exploiting our natural resources and ‘paying Guyana’ what they determine.
Why can’t government incentivise Guyanese at home and abroad to become investors/shareholders in exploitation of their own natural resources so that returns on investments would redound to Guyanese instead of foreigners?
Having said that, I now find rather odd that, instead of building on Ali’s suggestion of the steps that government will take for the bonds idea to become a reality, we have Finance Minister Ashni Singh, reportedly urging Guyanese to ‘look abroad for investment opportunities’ (KN, May 30, 2026).
His call not only appears to contradict Ali’s proposed bonds idea, but amounts to a WTFart kind of about face from a government that has long exhibited an aversion to Guyanese being the true owners of their country. Was Minister Singh instructed to ‘course correct’ Ali’s vision of government bonds, perhaps indicating disagreement in the Freedumb House? For Ashni’s information, overseas-based Guyanese are already investing abroad. Dammit!
While we await further clarity on that oddity, I want to address another KN article for May 30, “Legislation needed to compel Govt., Commissioner to provide public with information – APNU.” The reality here is that more legislation is not what is needed, but a building on the steps taken by Chartered Accountant, Attorney and Activist, Christopher Ram to engage the High Court’s attention for a resolution to the Charles Ramson Snr. problem. To-date, I have not seen any public record in which the High Court handed down any ruling on Ram’s motions filed in 2025, which means the matter is still open to an amicus curiae. Maybe the Court does not see the Ramson problem as a priority.
But if we revisit the appointment of Ramson to what appears to be Ramson’s tenured position as Information Commissioner (2013 to present), we learned from then Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Roger Luncheon, that “the Commissioner has powers to provide access to information if so required and to publish what is in the possession and control of public authorities”.
Additionally, “The Commissioner of Information, under the Act, has considerable powers, the power to ensure disclosure. Guyanese would be told, through the media, that this information is available, available for access by members of the public. The Commissioner would be advising Guyanese how that is to be done,” (“Former Appeal Court Judge Ramson now Information Commissioner,” (Guyana Chronicle, May 23, 2013).
To the nation’s dismay, not only has Ramson failed to live up to Luncheon’s 2013 preview of the job, but assurance that the Information Commissioner’s office would be located in Office of the President also did not materialise. In fact, Ramson’s residence has served as his government office with a taxpayer-funded sum of GY$40M or US$200,000 a year. The President doesn’t seem bothered by this skullduggery, but how can anyone comfortably collect millions of taxpayers’ dollars a year to do nothing, which is illegal, and not appear in High Court?
Besides, Guyanese seeking information would likely need to make an appointment and show up at a private residence to conduct government-related business. Who would compensate persons in event of injury or loss or worse while doing government business on private property?
Editor, since the caption of the news article in question cites APNU as its source, it invites commentary on the failure of the Coalition Government to legally address the Information Commissioner’s abdication of his taxpayer-funded responsibility. In a December 11, 2018 Stabroek News story, “Ramson sacked as Commissioner of Information since March,” Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo reportedly told the Committee of Supply, on December 10 or the day before, that Ramson was sacked in March 2018.
Almost one year later, Stabroek News did a follow-up on November 17, 2019, “Ramson still performing duties of Commissioner of Information despite purported ‘dismissal’.” Not only did Ramson successfully challenge the ‘dismissal’ claim in the High Court (January 11, 2019), he noted the Court ruled the Coalition’s actions constituted an ‘abuse of the process’.
Whether the Coalition Government understood at the time that the Information Access Act laid out the steps for removing the Information Commissioner (being ‘unfit to continue in office due to a physical or mental infirmity’ qualified since he was not doing his job), the government likely failed to go with Plan B: the same way the PPP used its parliamentary majority to pass the 2011 Act and appoint Ramson in 2013, the Coalition could have used its parliamentary majority to eliminate the post completely as opposed to trying to remove Ramson. The Coalition dropped the ball.
It is one thing for the PPP government to have disdain for the Constitution and Guyanese, but a whole different thing for the Opposition parties not to understand their taxpayer-funded role in response to or, in certain cases, preempting the government’s moves. If you are not an effective Opposition, you cannot expect to be an effective government. Period.