A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) has called for Ministers Juan Edghill and Deodat Indar to give evidence before the Commission of Inquiry into the MV Barima tragedy, saying scrutiny must extend beyond operational personnel to those responsible for policy, supervision and institutional preparedness.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, the opposition grouping also demanded that government disclose what changes had been made to maritime safety and emergency procedures since the disaster and whether those changes had been tested.
“The public servants, technical personnel and operational officers now answering questions serve below the level of ministers and the Government. Their testimony is necessary, but it cannot substitute for scrutiny of those who direct policy, approve priorities and oversee institutional performance,” APNU stated.
It said Edghill and Indar should answer questions about their responsibilities during the period under investigation, with accountability extending through the leadership of the Maritime Administration Department (MARAD) to the supervising ministers and government.
APNU pointed to Edghill’s legal representation at the inquiry, arguing that representation by counsel did not replace personal testimony about ministerial decisions, knowledge and oversight.
The grouping said evidence reported from the hearings raised disturbing questions about safety drills, maintenance arrangements, operating manuals, the registration of the vessel’s emergency beacon, communications during the rescue operation and limitations on night searches.
It also cited testimony that none of the 26 survivors rescued by one Coast Guard team had been wearing a life jacket, saying this required an explanation of how life-saving equipment had been made accessible and emergency instructions provided.
“These disclosures remain subject to the Commission’s assessment, but their seriousness cannot be dismissed,” APNU said.
The party described as particularly troubling reported evidence that Coast Guard standard operating procedures had not been updated during the commander’s three-year tenure and that joint search-and-rescue exercises had not been conducted.
“Preparedness cannot depend on waiting for a major disaster. Regular exercises are how institutions identify weaknesses before lives are lost,” it stated.
APNU said MARAD, as the maritime regulator, must account for its inspections, certification, enforcement and oversight, including deficiencies identified before the sinking and the steps taken to address them.
“What deficiencies were identified? What corrective action was required? Who verified compliance? What information reached the ministers, and what did they do with it?” the grouping asked.
It also called for examination of how maintenance, staffing, qualifications, rescue training, communications and emergency readiness had been prioritised and funded.
Where warnings or requests for resources existed, APNU said, the inquiry should establish who received them and how they responded.
“The ferry’s crew and operational staff must not be made scapegoats for failures extending through regulatory and political leadership,” it said, adding that each person’s conduct should be assessed fairly on the evidence.
Beyond establishing responsibility for the disaster, APNU sought an immediate account of measures taken to protect passengers who continue to use water transport.
It called on government to publish changes to maritime safety, search-and-rescue and emergency procedures, along with implementation dates, the officers responsible, and details of training and exercises completed.
The grouping also sought confirmation that distress beacons had been checked for registration, backup communications tested, life-saving equipment inspected, and passenger and cargo controls strengthened.
“Passengers continue to depend on these services while the inquiry proceeds. Their safety cannot wait for the final report,” APNU stated.
It urged that survivors and bereaved families receive regular information and practical access to the proceedings, saying their demands for answers, recovery of the vessel and accountability must be met with respect and action.
APNU also linked the institutional weaknesses emerging from the hearings to questions about government’s management of the country’s increased oil revenues.
It argued that greater financial resources should be reflected in qualified personnel, competent regulators, properly maintained equipment, reliable communications and rehearsed emergency systems.
In the grouping’s assessment, government had not demonstrated that oil revenues were being converted into the institutional strength and human capacity needed to protect citizens.
“Expenditure announcements provide no assurance that institutions can protect citizens when an emergency occurs,” it stated.
“The Commission must pursue the evidence through every level of responsibility. The ministers must answer. MARAD must account. The Government must demonstrate what it has corrected.”
Discussion