– says ties with firm at centre of controversy no secret

CITING an attack on her character by the Stabroek News, Minister of Public Telecommunications, Cathy Hughes has noted that the Integrity Commission as well as Cabinet has been made aware of her relationship to the law firm, Hughes, Fields and Stoby through her husband, attorney Nigel Hughes.

The minister was at the time responding to an article which appeared in the Monday, October 15, 2018 edition of the Stabroek News under the headline, “Transparency body sees ‘major’ conflict of interest for Hugheses over oil”.

The report centred on a release from the Transparency Institute of Guyana Inc (TIGI) which the newspaper has been privy to.

According to Minister Hughes, on July 4, 2018 she submitted her declaration of assets and interest to the Integrity Commission. “I am aware that the contents of my declaration are confidential, but I will disclose that included in my declaration was a clear statement of my marriage to the Managing Partner of Hughes, Fields and Stoby and his interest in the firm,” she said.
The minister went on to say that on October 9, 2018, she repeated her disclosure to the Cabinet about her husband’s position as Managing Partner of Hughes, Fields and Stoby, as well as the firm’s intention to establish an office in Houston, Texas.

“I also, prior to the publication of the article, sought legal advice on the disclosure and compliance requirements set out in the Laws of Guyana,” she noted.

She said that the newspaper appears to have had difficulty in contacting her prior to the printing of the news item, although, for years, the publication has been in possession of her contact numbers, and in the past has contacted her multiple times, including after hours and on weekends.

“It continues to be my fervent hope that in their efforts to express their views on activities of Ministers of the Government, that Stabroek News would at least conduct the most rudimentary of inquiries prior to publication to ensure balance, objectivity and fairness, which still is the foundation of good journalism,” Minister Hughes said.

Earlier on Monday, the law firm said in a statement that the article at reference clearly insinuated that “somehow, Minister Hughes would provide the firm with advance information on what laws, regulations and policies were in the pipeline.”

It stated that despite its best efforts, it has been unable to secure the full text of TIGI’s statement in order to discern the full context of the release.

The firm’s response to the article included similar sentiments as the minister’s regarding submissions to the Integrity Commission as well as to Cabinet.

It also noted that the newspaper made no contact with it regarding the claims put forward by TIGI. “Our own offices appear not to have any record or any inquiry from any member of the press, who, otherwise, frequently, at unorthodox hours, seek opinions and comments from its managing partner,” the firm said.

Hughes, Fields and Stoby said that like every other private organisation, it will have access to the processes regarding the establishment of legislation regarding the oil & gas sector, and that such access will be without any special privileges, ministerial or otherwise.
“We are unaware of any recent instance where a Cabinet decision went straight from Cabinet into law without any prior announcement or consultation,” the firm said.

“The oil-and-gas industry is in its nascent stages, and evidently many laws, regulations and policies will ensue over the coming years. There is path previously trod by many countries and easily discoverable, even if just by google,” it added.
It was noted, too, that the law firm’s representation of major players in the industry preceded the minister’s appointment to Cabinet as Minister of Tourism and now Minister of Public Telecommunication.

“We do not place, and have not placed our integrity as the basis for any special consideration for favourable or other consideration in the event of a conflict, whether by TIGI, Stabroek or any other body,” the law firm noted.

It stated, too, that it seeks “no privileges, special or otherwise; just an accurate reflection of both sides of the coin.”