HGP Nightly News – Vigilant Political Action Committee Leader Dorwain Bess is challenging the government to explain how it concluded that the MV Barima was not overloaded when the passenger manifest was inaccurate and officials had not publicly accounted for the ferry’s complete cargo.
Bess raised the issue after Public Works Minister Juan Edghill repeatedly maintained that overloading did not cause the vessel to capsize.
“What method was used to calculate what the passengers weighed [and] what the cargo was made up of?” Bess asked.
He questioned whether passengers were weighed individually or whether authorities used an estimated average. He also wants the government to disclose how the cargo was weighed, recorded and distributed aboard the ferry.
The concerns are particularly significant because numerous survivors did not appear on the original manifest. Authorities were therefore unable, during the early stages of the operation, to state definitively how many people had been aboard.
Officials also could not immediately provide a complete inventory of the cargo lost with the ferry.
MARAD Director General Stephen Thomas has said the MV Barima was certified to carry up to 394 passengers and approximately 126 tonnes of cargo, subject to loading conditions.
Thomas explained that the permitted combination could vary: fewer passengers would allow for more cargo, while a larger passenger load would reduce the available cargo capacity.
He said the vessel’s load line—the marking showing how deeply it could safely sit in the water—was used to determine whether it was overloaded.
Based on accounts reviewed by authorities, Thomas said the load line was around the water’s surface before departure. He added that the ferry would have floated slightly higher after moving from fresh water into denser seawater.
Bess questioned whether that assessment was sufficient when the precise passenger and cargo weights remained uncertain.
The load line can indicate whether a vessel exceeds its permitted overall displacement. It does not, however, resolve separate questions about where cargo was placed, whether heavy items were properly secured or whether weight was distributed in a way that affected stability.
Government officials have acknowledged that they could not immediately say how the MV Barima’s cargo was distributed. Reports that heavy machinery may have been placed on the upper deck have also been referred to the Commission of Inquiry.
Former Public Infrastructure Minister David Patterson has further complicated the issue by claiming that the ferry’s passenger capacity was approximately 150—far below the figure cited by MARAD.
The government has not yet publicly released the complete certification and technical records needed to reconcile the two figures.
Bess said the state’s ownership and operation of the ferry placed responsibility for its safety directly on the government.
“These ferries are owned and controlled by the state,” he said.
He also called for the publication of the vessel’s inspection and maintenance recommendations. According to Bess, documents prepared ahead of its scheduled dry docking called for the replacement of its two main engine turbochargers.
Public Works Minister Edghill has said the ferry was last dry-docked in 2024 and was scheduled for planned maintenance during the second half of 2026. He maintained that no report declared the vessel unseaworthy and that the proposed works were part of routine maintenance.
The appearance of an item in a dry-docking schedule does not, on its own, prove that the vessel was unsafe. Bess argued, however, that investigators must establish whether any recommendation required the ferry to be removed from service sooner.
He also raised concerns about fuel carried aboard the vessel. Edghill previously confirmed that government cargo included fuel and all-terrain vehicles, though a complete inventory was not immediately available.
Bess wants investigators to determine whether carrying the fuel was standard practice, how it was stored and whether all rules governing the transportation of petroleum products were followed.
He called for a criminal investigation into possible negligence, arguing that charges should follow if the evidence shows that officials knowingly placed passengers at risk.
No official investigation has established that the MV Barima was overloaded, unseaworthy or improperly carrying fuel. Those remain disputed questions.
The inquiry must now go beyond assurances and produce the underlying evidence: an accurate passenger count, a reconciled cargo manifest, weight and stability calculations, maintenance records and the vessel’s valid safety certification. Only then can the government’s claim that the ferry was not overloaded be independently tested.
