admin

More protection needed for online shoppers Aug 06, 2024 Letters Dear Editor, I wish to highlight an online shopping experience I had with a company called Websourse Guyana Inc. I have a mailbox with this company. I purchased a few items from Amazon.com on the 13th June, 2024. According to my tracking records, the package was delivered to my mailbox address of which Websourse is the receiving agent on my behalf. The tracking information showed this was done on the 24th June 2024 at 9:30am. After a while, I expected my package to arrive in Guyana. This wasn’t so. I enquired from Websourse staff and shared all the relevant tracking information. All information pointed fingers to my package handed over to an agent at the Miami facility for final delivery to me. The company denied that they received my package. Editor, my expectation was that when you take out an online shopping mailbox, the custodian of that mail box will represent any relating issue that may arise in relation to it. This was not so in my case with Websourse. I spent over two weeks querying the whereabouts of my package from over 10 Amazon customer care representatives. They all responded that this package was delivered to the intended address which is Websourse Miami FL. I made a final enquiry from United States Postal Service (USPS) and they finally responded saying, “According to our tracking records, your package was delivered as addressed to a third-party reshipper at the destination address of this package. Therefore, the tracking number associated with it is not eligible for further enquiry. For further assistance with this package, please contact third-party reshipper”. There was no issue with my mailing address as this was accurately stated. I contacted and shared all my queried information with the manager of Websourse Guyana Inc. This is what she had to say, “We are very sorry that this has happened but we are hopeful that just as you believe the shipping companies in America, you believe us when we say we did not receive your package. We will keep you posted if the package shows up at any time, but until then this is out of our control”. I easily ended up empty handed for no fault of mine. This situation highlights a big risk you take when you shop online. Be It Websourse or any other online shipping company, no shopper should lose his or her money or purchases as mentioned above. There needs to be accountability and here is where the relevant government agencies must address this kind of situation urgently. A thorough review of online shopping and shipping regulations must be had to provide greater protection to consumers and online shoppers. Yours sincerely, Collin Woolford Related Similar Articles

What emancipation means to us? Aug 06, 2024 Letters Dear Editor, August marks the month of celebrations of Emancipation and a time when we highlight the end of 400 years of the enslavement of The African Peoples. It also marks a month where we highlight the great achievements of the Freed Men and Women of The African Race, they created a formidable path of progress for us to travel, that road was paved with hard work, determination and frugal management of their resources. Our ancestors did not fight for freedom for themselves alone, they fought for the freedom of future generations, The freed men formed the Village Movement owning villages with the little earnings they had, and working them with their bare hands; institutions such as “Box hand” and other cooperative financing systems were established. There was no assistance given to them by the colonials, these were the beginnings of organized development of The African Race here in Guyana.  We salute the achievements of our ancestors, the indomitable spirit of our ancestors who wove a tapestry of progress and development in every area of their existence. Today, we stand on the shoulders of our forefathers who showed us the way; therefore, it is indicative that we build on the firm foundation set by them. Now, we come to the part of history that many in The Afro-Centric Circles do not want the rest of us to know, that is, soon after there was an “Urban movement” of The Black Race. The Afro-Centric Peoples slowly moved into the urban centres to make their home. It is interesting to know, that urban living has its associated ills, which the race found very expensive and demanding.  To compensate for that crazy move of theirs, Afro-Guyanese then began to manufacture a multitude of excuses, such as, my fore parents have not left us anything to subsist on. This was a blatant lie, because the rich legacy left the race was willingly abandoned for the glit and glamour of an urban lifestyle, as they conveniently forgot where they’ve come from. Around this same period of our history, saw the institution of the race card or the blame the other race for their misfortune. The Indian who was now emerging from indentureship long after their erstwhile counterparts, became the target of Black Rage. I am talking about The Indian who was now on the scene with the pittance earned from work on the plantation, who began purchasing the land left by their Black neighbours. The Indian, who used the very same frugal methods started by the Afro-Centric Peoples before, became the object of ridicule; something used for political convenience to this day. This is the treasure chest The Opposition has kept alive through the years. Nevertheless, their hollow outcry of racism cannot erase two fundamental facts of history, that is, the work done by our Black Ancestors which stands as a beacon, and a lasting reminder for future generations and the sad misfortune of how a people lost their way. Respectfully Submitted, Neil Adams Related Similar Articles

Response to the MoE’s comment on “No Fault Divorce” Aug 06, 2024 Letters Dear Editor, The Minister of Education was kind enough to respond on Facebook to CRG’s recent letter on “No Fault Divorce”. In her response she stated that property was always divided equally regardless of who misbehaved during the marriage. The question I posed to her was why didn’t her administration focus on correcting that unjust process. I am still awaiting her response. Instead of using the opportunity in Parliament to ensure that there was increased accountability in our Guyanese households, the current administration has decided to reduce the clarity around accountability. No wonder there is increasing corruption and lack of transparency in the country under their watch. We must hold ourselves and others accountable for any wrongdoing. The current audit process is unnecessarily sluggish and backdated. All of the ministries should undergo an annual financial audit before being allowed to request an increase in their budget. We must as a country avoid hiding what is wrong if we wish to have sustainable economic prosperity and progress. The current choice to further hide what is wrong, reduce accountability and to continue to allow an unfair no fault process is indicative of what is wrong under the current administration. Hopefully, the President will eventually make the correct choice. With concern, Mr. Jamil Changlee Related Similar Articles

The Labour Act is in need of an update Aug 06, 2024 Letters Dear Editor, The recent issues raised over the failure of private sector companies to pay NIS for their employees prompted CRG to review the current Labour Act of Guyana. The Ministry of Labour should also review and update the Labour Act. There is no provision in the current act that makes the necessary requirements to protect workers’ retirement by ensuring pension benefits. The increasing expansion of the private sector should be met with increased cooperation in the joint development of the necessary provisions. It is great to see that the President has taken interest in the current problem, but we must also ensure the necessary laws are reinforced. Updating the Labor Act to close the gaps in worker protections and to reflect the changes in the economy is a good step forward towards beneficial progress for worker rights. Best regards, Jamil Changlee Related Similar Articles

GOAL-the great equaliser Aug 06, 2024 Letters Dear Editor, I am quite pleased that GOAL, the Guyana Online Academy of Learning, is very much trending in Guyana. I read that it is preparing to launch its next round of scholarship applications and I really hope that the public will take time to “… follow the guidelines on compiling and saving key documents necessary for the application process….” In this age of technology, there is no excuse to ‘miss out.’ In fact, the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) has gone overboard in fostering education in the country. Just internalize this: “The 2024 Budget confirms its focus on education. (As) In 2024, the Guyana Government allocated approximately $100.5 billion to the education sector. This includes $4.1 billion for the University of Guyana and $4 billion for the Guyana Online Academy of Learning (GOAL) programme. Additionally, $4.9 billion is dedicated to the school-feeding programme, benefitting about 126,000 children nationwide. The “Because We Care” student grant was increased to $40,000 per child and a $5,000 uniform voucher, amounting to $9.2 billion for these transfers.” On the larger scale, this is situating Guyana in a good global position. According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), all nations are obligated to provide “ … free primary and secondary schooling for all boys and girls by 2030, the aim is to provide equal access to affordable vocational training, eliminate gender and wealth disparities, and achieve universal access to quality higher education.” This is tied to the fact that “Education is the key that will allow many other Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to be achieved. When people are able to get quality education they can break from the cycle of poverty.” After all, “Education helps to reduce inequalities and to reach gender equality. It also empowers people everywhere to live more healthy and sustainable lives. Education is also crucial to fostering tolerance between people and contributes to more peaceful societies.” Editor, the evidence is abundant. In Guyana, “GOAL has significantly transformed the learning landscape … offering anyone eager to further their studies the chance to do so from the comfort of their homes. Since its inception, more than 20,000 scholarships have been awarded, surpassing the initial target.” As we recall, many tried discrediting GOAL when it was being touted, but the PPP/C did not waver and launched it in 2021, as “…  an initiative of the Guyanese government, aimed at providing 20,000 scholarships to Guyanese citizens (thus) enabling them to pursue online, tertiary-level courses through partnerships with reputable international universities.” For pure joy at GOAL’s success, I love revisiting how in May this year, there was a second GOAL graduation ceremony, at which over 1600 persons graduated in university level courses-bachelor degree, post graduate diplomas, and  master’s degrees. I just hope that we will continue to capitalize on what is on-going educationally. To enjoy free tuition from GOAL is not a trivial matter. In highly developed nations, many cannot pursue higher learning and why? It is just ‘far too costly.’ Yours truly, HB Singh Related Similar Articles

Support for Justice Gino Persaud’s Decision to Recognise and Enforce the Arbitral Award Aug 06, 2024 Letters Dear Editor, I would like to support Justice Gino Persaud’s decision on enforcing the arbitral award from the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Award 2019. The case is Conoco Phillips Gulf of Paria B.V v. Corporacion de Venezolana de Petroleo, S.A, Petroleos de Venezuela S.A. Justice Persaud in his decision indicated that ‘The notions submitted by the AG in writing at paragraphs 69 and 71 of his submissions that if I were to recognise the Award it would be wholly offensive and expose the Court in the minds of the Guyanese people to allegations of unpatriotic and anti-nationalist conduct is an offensive submission if not a veiled threat to the independence of the judiciary designed to intimidate the Court’. Further, Justice Persaud indicated that ‘The AG is not the legal guardian of the minds of the Guyanese people. It is an opportunistic political argument perhaps best suited to the hustings of an elections campaign than a sound legal argument suitable for Court’. In my view, the judge’s decision on the recognition and enforcement of the Award was correct in law. However, a question to be asked is whether the AG has blurred the lines in his submission, between his role as the Attorney General, the chief legal officer and that of Minister of Legal Affairs, the chief advisor to the government on legal policy? Another important point for consideration is international dispute resolution, arbitral awards and their enforcement and execution. The Judge found that the company ConocoPhillips had successfully registered and enforced the award in the United Kingdom, United States, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and other countries. The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Convention (ICSID), Regulations and Rules, Section 6, Recognition and Enforcement of the Award, indicates under Article 54 (1) ‘Each Contracting State shall recognize an award rendered pursuant to this Convention as binding and enforce the pecuniary obligations imposed by that award within its territories as if it were a final judgment of a court in that State. A Contracting State with a federal constitution may enforce such an award in or through its federal courts and may provide that such courts shall treat the award as if it were a final judgment of the courts of a constituent state.’ Article 54 (3) indicates ‘Execution of the award shall be governed by the laws concerning the execution of judgments in force in the State in whose territories such execution is sought’. Article 55 ‘Nothing in Article 54 shall be construed as derogating from the law in force in any Contracting State relating to immunity of that State or of any foreign State from execution’. The New York Convention – Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards governs the registration and enforcement of so-called “foreign” arbitral awards. The Convention notes that ‘Contracting States must generally recognize arbitration awards rendered in other Contracting States and enforce them in accordance with their rules of procedure.’ The grounds for a national court refusing enforcement are limited based on one of the six reasons: public policy; lack of a valid arbitration agreement; violation of due process; excess of the arbitral tribunal’s authority; irregularity in the composition of the arbitral tribunal or arbitral procedure; or where the award has not yet become binding, has been set aside or suspended. The Attorney General in this case used the grounds of public policy to request that Guyana Court refuse to enforce the award. While one can understand the grounds used by the AG based on public policy, the question is, was the substantive argument sufficient to convince the national court that the award should not be enforced based on a point of law. While the public policy argument focused on the ‘essential security interest’ of Guyana, it was very broad. For the AG to indicate that if the court were to recognise the Award it would be offensive and expose the Court to allegations of being unpatriotic and anti-nationalist, was highly inappropriate. The jurisprudence and practice on Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) is still evolving. As such, on the procedural side, perhaps the AG in his capacity of Minister of Legal Affairs, can explore State immunity, specifically, for the recognition, enforcement, and execution of arbitral awards by Guyana in relation to Venezuela, based on the border controversy. However, this may have to be an additional procedure, if found to have merit and put into effect, would be applicable in future cases. The company ConocoPhillips has already brought the case before the national courts and a decision was made to recognize and enforce the award based on current established procedures.It may be an important point for the AG to note that in some cases, State immunity has been used to bar measures of execution of Investor-State Dispute Settlement awards. In the case of AIG v. Kazakhstan, an English court registered an ICSID award as an English judgment, however, the Court rejected execution on the ground that the assets in question benefitted from absolute immunity because they were “property” of the Kazakhstan central bank and because they were sovereign rather than commercial assets. Another landmark judgment in a case before the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal held that absolute state immunity applies in Hong Kong China. Under the absolute theory, immunity applies to all foreign State assets whether they are used for sovereign or purely commercial transactions. Therefore, investors cannot execute awards against foreign States in Hong Kong China in the absence of a waiver of immunity. Can some limited immunity be considered for Guyana, in the case of Guyana and Venezuela based on a substantive argument of public policy from the essential security interest perspective? If Guyana should in the future effect a procedure for using State immunity, specifically for recognition, enforcement, and execution of arbitral awards in relation to Venezuela because of the border controversy, then judges in future cases would have this established national procedure for consideration. However, until the national Courts have some additional procedural positions for consideration, foreign investors are entitled to be accorded the general standards on fair and equitable treatment in enforcement of arbitral awards. Therefore, Justice Persaud’s decision to recognize and enforce the arbitral Award was appropriate based on the jurisprudence and practice in International Investment Law, Investment Treaty Law, Administrative Law, International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes Convention (ICSID) and the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (The New York Convention). Finally, while this case has presented a challenge in the Guyana context, it has presented an opportunity for Guyana, more specifically for the AG, to be creative and innovative and perhaps expand the jurisprudence and practice of ISDS, instead of the AG focusing on his feeling and threatening to take the judge to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC). Kind regards, Citizen Audreyanna Thomas Related Similar Articles