IF you did not read it, my column for Thursday, June 6, was about the caricature of NGOs and civil society groups that are one-person bandwagons and the need for the impending legislation to stop this masquerade. It reduced the society to comicality when a man here, a woman there decides he/she can speak for society and they, in fact, speak for no one other than themselves.

I have seen this outrage for decades and decades in this country and it makes citizens laugh. It is ubiquitous in Guyana. There are political parties in a formation named APNU, and except for the PNC, all of them are absurdities. Each one of them sleeping is in a tent that cannot accommodate a new-born kitten. In other words, they are one-man shows.
There is a civil society body in this land that often can be seen in the media. It is named the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GCCI). Do you know that body has more than 90 active constituents with a healthy bank balance? That is a real NGO that speaks for a sizeable chunk of the business community in Guyana.

More importantly, after two years, the president of GCCI is gone. He faces term limits. We have one-man outfits in Guyana that remind us of many Charles Bronson movies, in which Bronson is a one-man army. When you see those Bronson movies, there and then see the farce we have in Guyana.
Any discussion on the one-man train has to begin with Mr. Mike McCormack, who heads a group named Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA). Over the decades, there has not been one meeting of civil society gatherings where the GHRA sent a representative and that person was someone other than Mike McCormack. There has not been one statement from the GHRA the past 40 years which was signed by someone else other than Mike McCormack. No one knows who makes up the executive body or council or board of directors of the GHRA. We will never ever get that information because it is a one-man army.

Secondly, there is Vanda Radzik-Veira. She is listed as a civil society activist. Which group does Ms. VRV belong to? She appeared on the programme of the Palestinian Mother’s Day Vigil as “civil society activist.” She was listed on the HARDtalk oil documentary as, “civil society activist.” Who does Ms. VRV speak for?
Enter a lady name Elizabeth Hughes. I have spent my entire life in social activism and I never heard about this woman until a year ago when the two anti-government private newspapers began to carry her statements on the oil industry. I repeat, I have been involved as a protestor in Guyana’s affairs since I was 16 and until 2023, I never knew there was a person named Elizabeth Hughes.
Now this week, Ms. Hughes had requested that state documents from the Ministry of Natural Resources be sent to her on the gas to shore project. She is quoted in the Kaieteur News as saying, “show us the documents?” Who are us? The minute she said, “show us,” then, she is either speaking on behalf of an entity or the Guyanese people.

It has to be this explanation and no other because no rational human would demand government had over state documents to him/her simply because as an individual, they want to see the papers. That never happened in politics and will never happen.
I am willing for Ms. Hughes to speak on my behalf, but she has an obligation to me as someone who has been a social activist for over 55 years in my country to address my queries. The answer must be provided because she, as a citizen, wants questions from government and I, as a citizen, want questions from her who purports to speak on behalf of the Guyanese people.

Here are my questions. Does she have any training in petroleum engineering, environmental science of financial management? Can Ms. Hughes tell us the name of her organisation, the names in the hierarchy, the date of the recent election of office bearers? Does her entity have persons representative of the ten Regions in Guyana, and if not how many of the 10 Regions are represented in her group? What do the numbers look like in terms of membership?
Finally, does Ms. Hughes feel that the five months of attempted rigging was more detrimental to the very existence of Guyana than the gas to shore project? If no, why not? If yes, can she tell us if she was involved in speaking out against the fraud? If no, why not? I close by reminding, Ms. Hughes, she has an obligation to answer my questions.