More than three weeks after the horrific tragedy of July 18, it is clear that the obduracy of the government will not be penetrated. It has adamantly refused to ameliorate the grief of the families of victims by removing Ministers Edghill and Indar. Moreover, President Ali has embarked on a campaign that appears intended to outflank the grief and rage that has risen in the aftermath of the capsizing of the ferry and the loss of an estimated 100 lives.
For its part, the opposition has been energetically engaged in protests for the departure of the two ministers and to elicit answers to key questions though it failed to pursue these in the last parliament session that it transformed into raucousness.
The next phase of this exercise will test the intent and wherewithal of both the government and the opposition and there is also a role for civil society. Despite reservations over the composition of the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) it appears that the government is proceeding as is. If that is the case, the interests of the victims of this tragedy – both the living and the dead – have to be secured in the face of a State that has not always behaved evenhandedly towards victims. Two prime examples of this were evident in the cases of the families of the three men killed in the July 18 – that date again – 2012 unrest in Linden and the deaths of 20 children in the Mahdia dormitory fire of 2023.
Aware of the conduct of the state in the grip of PPP/C governance this is where real work can be done by the opposition parties and civil society on behalf of the families of at least 100 dead and missing persons and those survivors who were traumatized. If one assumes with good reason – based on current behaviour – that the government will go all out to limit its culpability in the matter of the MV Barima then there can’t be any confidence that the secretary of the CoI and counsel can be relied upon to properly secure the interests of those who died and their families.
The opposition and any others who can help must therefore begin mobilizing counsel for the 100 families and assisting them in the preparation of statements on matters they may wish to testify on before the Commission. These statements have to be triangulated for accuracy taking full account of blurred timelines and the desperate periods on the water where no one had any idea of time, whether they would live or die and witnessing the devastation of death all around them.
These statements have to be watertight to prevent any exclusion by the Commission and must be submitted prior to any deadline. Counsel must be available to assist all of the persons who are prepared to offer testimony to the commission.
While information is being awaited on the loci of the hearings one can reasonably assume that these will be held in both Georgetown and Port Kaituma – where the unconscionably delayed stelling is situated. Arrangements will have to be made for the interested families to travel from the areas they reside to attend the hearings. Significant transport, accommodation and food costs will be entailed here and there is no assurance that the government will cover these. The opposition, civil society and other groups interested in justice will have to play their part.
Expert and knowledgeable witnesses will also have to be mobilized such as persons who can testify about the seaworthiness of a vessel of the age of the MV Barima on the treacherous waters approaching the mouth of the Pomeroon. A former captain has already spoken publicly about his travails on the ferry and there must be others who can be sounded out on testifying before this Commission.
This Commission must not fail to deliver justice. The evidence before the Commission must be weighty and irrefutable. So, while the street action of the opposition and other groups has been recognised in the context of the right to mobilize for a cause and to be heard, an even more important phase beckons. The victims of this terrible tragedy must be assisted to secure justice.
Discussion