ILLEGAL but persistent minibus touting has long been in survival mode despite adverse public opinion and intermittent police crackdowns.
This persistent nuisance exhibits various shades of criminality, including the growing and blatant disrespect for authority and should not be allowed to continue. Amidst the country’s progressive emphasis on tourism, the recent public outrage against sexual abuse, and a growing need for public order, the authorities should condignly terminate this aberration.
The Guyana Police Force must treat this aspect of what is euphemistically referred to as ‘minibus culture’ as a clear and present danger to our travelling public, regardless of age, ethnicity or nationality. The most targeted, and vulnerable appear to be schoolgirls, nubile women, and tourists.
A letter-writer in one of our dailies recently lamented his disgusting and unsettling experience when he witnessed a young schoolgirl being tugged by minibus conductors and touts in the vicinity of our iconic Stabroek Market Square. The letter-writer noted that the girl was visibly upset, naturally, but the worst part of what was an assault in legal terms, was the braggadocio of one of the touts who announced to a bus conductor that he had “touched her inappropriately.”

Unfortunately, in many incidents of harassment by minibus touts while soliciting passengers, citizens generally take a vow of silence and decline the role of ‘my brother’s keeper’ or ‘my sister’s keeper,’ and don’t even sound a voice of censure.
In fact, in the so-called ‘minibus culture,’ touting, loud and ribald music, fondling and other aspects of harassment, as well as reckless driving have become the new normal.
While there have been sporadic condemnation of minibus touting by individuals, and half-hearted police clampdowns, the problem has not yet drawn any notable attention from civil society.
There is need for concerted and outspoken opposition against this wanton disregard for minibus passengers, who support what essentially is a public service being provided by private sector entrepreneurs.
Some touts are seen engaging in a ritual tug-o-war, but instead of a rope they grab the bags and even the persons of besieged passengers, sometimes after a 25-yard dash to the unsuspecting targets.

This tactic disregards the right of each passenger to decide which minibus to choose, while the absence of a regulated queuing system for minibuses persists.
Meanwhile, it must not be overlooked that minibus touts are part of a self-employed, low-level hustle. However, it was estimated that a minibus tout can pull in over $10,000 per day, depending on passenger traffic and weather conditions. And that’s tax-free earnings, without actual overheads or need for any skillset.
According to news reports, there have been occasions when touts were charged and appeared in court before a magistrate and those who pleaded guilty were ordered to pay fines ranging from $5,000 to $15,000. Those who pleaded not guilty were placed on bail and scheduled to return to court on various dates.
The police raids are at best rare, on-again-off-again ventures, which yield no lasting change in the modus operandi of loading minibuses in the city, quite unlike the civil practice seen in our CARICOM neighbours.

Another aspect of minibus touting that is not readily discernible is the extortion scheme, whereby bus drivers and owners are required to pay a sort of tithe for the service, even unsolicited, of having their vehicles loaded by strong-arm tactics.
There have been instances when some young men utilise this avenue of catching a quick dollar, but sooner rather than later upgrade themselves to emerge as more productive individuals in sustainable economic pursuits. Many others, too many, however, are louts who shirk their social responsibility and get caught in the dependency culture, taking refuge among the underclass.
When all is said and done, it is the police who must face the major challenge of uprooting this loathsome and law-breaking practice of minibus touting, summoning up the will and manpower to ensure its termination, once and for all.
Perhaps it would be useful if a multi-disciplinary approach is taken in dealing with this problem. Touts can be targeted by social welfare officers, in addition to faith-based and civil society organisations that can make an attempt at motivating some behavioural change. We need not rely exclusively or merely on law-enforcement intervention.