-says it will further contribute to division

EIGHT hours of rigorous debates in a tension-filled environment ended with the defeat of a PPP-piloted motion,which sought to block a Commission of Inquiry (CoI) set up by the President to address land- titling.

In March of this year, President David Granger moved to have the six-man CoI set up to examine and make recommendations to resolve issues surrounding Amerindian and African land issues in Guyana.

The option to have land issues of both groups addressed together was immediately rejected by the National Toshaos Council (NTC) and the opposition party.
Using the legislative arm of government to have the issue addressed differently, the PPP brought a motion in the name of its member Pauline Sukhai to block the CoI.
However, after eight hours, 13 speeches, several heated exchanges and a walk-out by the Speaker, government used its one-seat majority to defeat the motion which many of its members believed was “unnecessary.”

Providing clarity on the nature of the CoI was Minister within the Ministry of Communities, Dawn Hastings-Williams, who said that it was designed to resolve issues the PPP government had created.
She said that the CoI will investigate claims in an objective way as opposed to having lands being awarded at the discretion of individuals.
Taking a light jab at the opposition, the minister reasoned that it was unacceptable for that party to go to the National Assembly and say that the CoI is “ill-willed” when they (the PPP) did worse when they were in office.

She referenced the lamentations of scores of Indigenous leaders who had complained about not being invited to consultations prior to the passage of the Amerindian Act of 2006.
To remedy this problem, Minister Hastings-Williams told the House that: “We are putting systems in place for this not to occur again,” while adding that the opposition party had 23 years to address those issues but chose not to.
But PPP front- bencher Frank Anthony would have none of it. In response to this claim, he boasted of the “progress” made in addressing the concerns of the Indigenous peoples of Guyana, under the PPP. He specifically referenced the Amerindian Act, which he said took years of hard work to bring into effect.

Shifting his attention to the CoI, Anthony argued that this mechanism was not necessary to address this type of problem, since the land issues with the Indigenous people were different from those of the Africans.
“The two issues are separate… and so we need to find a proper mechanism. This undertaking cannot be done in a few months,” the MP opined.
While acknowledging that this was an issue which needed to be addressed at the soonest possible time, Anthony was heckled by government MP Khemraj Ramjattan, who reminded him (Anthony) that his party had 23 years to fix the problem but never did.
Ignoring Minister Ramjattan, he continued with his presentation, eventually calling for the CoI to be abandoned as he concluded his speech.

But Minister Raphael Trotman, who is known for his fiery speeches in the House, rejected this proposal although he agreed with several of the opposition MPs.
According to Trotman, it was true that the issues related to land- titling for both ethnic groups were separate in nature.
“The two issues have nothing to do with each other and will remain separate from each other” he said, reasoning that Indigenous lands, which are found in the hinterland, will be dealt with separately from lands claimed by Africans on the coast.
Dismissing allegations by the opposition that there was something “sinister” behind the decision to have a CoI, Minister Trotman detailed the series of events which lead to the decision being made by the President.

He said that during the 2015 election campaign, President David Granger had visited several Indigenous communities in Region Nine and was made aware of the issues affecting residents. However, it was soon realised that land-titling was not an issue affecting Indigenous peoples from one area, but across the country.
And subsequent to a meeting in Region Nine, Trotman said that he and Minister Joseph Harmon met with President Granger, who was then presidential candidate for the APNU+AFC coalition, to discuss a solution to the problem.
“The President met us and said he had heard the cries of the people and so he announced that he would set up a CoI to resolve the issue once elected to office. So this was not an overnight decision. It was birthed out of 23 years of traversing this country” Trotman told the House.

But according to Opposition Chief Whip, Gail Teixeira, even though this was the case, the CoI does not point in the direction of a resolution.
“Not one member of the other side has stated what were the issues and injustices that the COI seeks to address. This commission will rectify nothing,” she argued.
But former Toshao and Minister of Social Cohesion, Dr. George Norton, was of an opposing conviction.
He offered that the CoI is the most suitable option for public discourse geared towards settling this dispute.

He contended that it was not about Indigenous land rights or African land rights in isolation, but it was about the sustainable use of land and the fair distribution of same. As such, the minister said that the CoI is the ideal mechanism, since it provides a holistic approach to the issue, and provides a platform for recommendations to be made on the way forward.
Bringing the curtain down on the debate was Pauline Sukhai, who reiterated most of what her colleagues had said. She was keen to note too that most of the points made by Minister Trotman were fair, even though she disagrees with the operationalisation of the CoI.
“A CoI is not the answer” she maintained, adding that it would further divide an already fragmented nation.
At 22:10hrs, the government used its one-seat majority to vote against the motion which was lost at the end of a day’s sitting.