HGP Nightly News – The Commission of Inquiry into the MV Barima disaster cannot replace the separate technical marine safety investigation required to determine precisely how and why the ferry capsized, Guyana’s Joint Opposition has argued.
While welcoming President Irfaan Ali’s appointment of a five-member international commission, the opposition said the two investigative processes have different purposes and both should proceed.
A Commission of Inquiry can examine public administration, institutional failures, political accountability and possible misconduct. A marine safety investigation would concentrate on the technical causes of the casualty and the measures needed to prevent another one.
The Joint Opposition said the safety investigation should be conducted in keeping with the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, the International Maritime Organization Casualty Investigation Code and relevant international standards governing domestic ferries.
Its statement was issued by We Invest in Nationhood, A Partnership for National Unity, the Forward Guyana Movement, the Alliance For Change and the Vigilant Political Action Committee.
The parties also criticised the President for selecting the commissioners without consulting the parliamentary opposition or other national stakeholders.
They did not dispute the members’ professional qualifications but argued that the scale of the disaster required a process designed through broader national participation.
Ali named Belizean jurist Justice Godfrey Phillip Smith to chair the commission.
The other members are Polish naval architect and marine engineer Dr. Andrzej Jasionowski, Jamaican maritime surveyor Captain Hamada Fouda, Trinidad and Tobago admiralty lawyer Nyree Dawn Alfonso and retired Trinidadian Rear Admiral Hayden Pritchard.
The opposition said the appointment of international experts was welcome, but the commission’s credibility would depend on its independence, administration and willingness to investigate decisions at every level.
It also questioned the timing of Ali’s announcement, which came shortly before the National Assembly was expected to consider opposition motions on the tragedy.
The establishment of the commission cannot displace Parliament’s constitutional responsibility to debate matters of national importance, the parties argued. Nor does it remove the executive’s obligation to answer questions from elected representatives.
APNU parliamentarian Dr. Terrence Campbell had written to Speaker Manzoor Nadir seeking an urgent debate on the inquiry’s composition, powers and terms of reference.
The Joint Opposition said the inquiry must examine more than the actions of the captain, crew and wharf employees.
Its mandate should reach ministerial oversight, regulatory enforcement, maintenance, procurement, emergency preparedness and the administrative decisions that kept the ageing ferry in service.
Ali’s announced terms of reference require the commission to examine the MV Barima’s seaworthiness, maintenance history, loading, passenger and cargo records, crew conduct and compliance with maritime regulations.
It will also review the search, rescue and recovery operation and determine whether negligence, misconduct, dereliction of duty or other failures contributed to the disaster.
The opposition maintained that a specialist safety investigation would go deeper into areas such as vessel stability, cargo distribution, structural condition, machinery, environmental conditions and the sequence of events immediately before the capsizing.
It would also issue technical recommendations aimed specifically at preventing another maritime casualty.
The parties raised concerns about the appointment of the commission’s secretary, although they did not publicly detail the basis of their objection.
They said independence must apply not only to the commissioners but also to the administration responsible for managing evidence, records and witnesses.
The Joint Opposition further renewed its call for Public Works Minister Juan Edghill and Deodat Indar, the minister with responsibility for MARAD, to resign or proceed on leave while the investigation is conducted.
According to the opposition, their continued oversight of agencies whose decisions may be examined could weaken public confidence.
Neither minister has been found responsible for the disaster, and the government has not indicated that either will step aside.
For the opposition, the Commission of Inquiry is a necessary beginning, but not the complete investigative response. One process must examine responsibility and governance; the other must establish the technical causes and translate them into safer maritime operations.
