FOLLOWING the disclosures in the Amerindian Act 2006, a tremendous amount of pressure was brought by the Amerindian people and civil society on the Guyana government, demanding that action be taken to amend the Act under dispute. Since then, nothing of great significance overtly took place other than the contempt of court dismissal against Toshao Mario Hastings by Justice Naresh Harnanan with respect to the amendment of the Amerindian Act 2006 and the controversy of mining. There was no comprehensive approach or determined effort made to settle the issue.
Correspondence and discussions continued unchecked between the APA and the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs. But disputes between the Amerindians and the ministry with respect to their Amerindian Act 2006, are known to exist since the Kako people opposed mining in their communities and waterways because of the use of chemicals.
The problem of mercury also illustrates an important point. Often the problems of exposure to chemicals are not solely restricted to miners or individuals working in the particular area, but are the concern of all Amerindian communities. Therefore, mercury cannot easily be divorced from the wider issue of people and environmental concerns.
It is too early even now to speculate upon the amendment of the Act.But, as I think of the opportunities which the APA offer, I am reminded of what a wise man once said: “Let there be sunshine on both sides of the Iron Curtain; and if ever the sunshine should be equal on both sides, the Curtain will be no more”
 It is clear that the drafting and assenting to the Act 2006 by the former President in the whole matter seemed to have been confused and bungled from its very inception, building up into frustration with no one discovering a sound bridge on which both sides could cross and reach a settlement satisfactory to the Amerindians.