THE People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C) has registered its concern over Transparency International’s (TI’s) rating of Guyana on the Corruption Perception Index (CPI), and has outlined shortcomings that affect the credibility of that rating.At a press conference at Freedom House yesterday, PPP Central Committee Member, Dharamkumar Seeraj said: “The credibility and integrity of the report on Guyana will continue to be held suspect by a wide cross section of the Guyanese people, unless Transparency International puts in place new and transparent modalities in the way they conduct their business in Guyana.”

In the TI report, released last week, Guyana dropped lower on the index, scoring 27 out of 100 points, compared to the 28 it scored last year. According to the report, the index scores 177 countries and territories from zero (highly corrupt) to 10 (very clean) based on perceived levels of public sector corruption.

Seeraj said: “While respecting the organisation’s right to obtain information from whatever sources it deems necessary, (the party)
nevertheless feels compelled to draw attention to the body’s reliance on information from organisations and individuals which have known hostility towards the ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic administration and (with) obvious links to Opposition parties. Under such circumstances, it is not illogical to assume that subjective and partisan influences can be brought to bear on the information and data-gathering processes, which in turn can introduce biases into the report.”

On that note, he reiterated sentiments expressed by President Donald Ramotar last week, and called for Transparency International to review its sources and make public its methodology and sampling techniques in gathering the data used to arrive at the rating.

“Adequate consideration was not taken by those responsible for providing information on Guyana as it relates to several initiatives taken by the current administration, at both the legislative and administrative levels, to improve accountability and transparency in Guyana,” Seeraj declared.
He referred to moves made to establish an Integrity Commission, and the consistent presentation of the Auditor General’s Report to the National Assembly for scrutiny as factors which TI must take into account in preparing its reports on Guyana.

According to him, the party has “serious difficultly” in accepting Guyana’s ranking by Transparency International, given “manifested biases and prejudices” of officials involved with the local Chapter, Transparency Institute of Guyana Inc. (TIGI).

CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM
Asked about the party’s position in regard to considering genuine areas of shortcomings identified in the report, Seeraj explained that the ruling party adheres to the principle of accepting “objective and constructive” criticism. He said: “The PPP/C Government has always welcomed constructive criticism, and we deal with constructive criticism…. No Government is perfect, no party is perfect, but we expect that, in addressing areas in which imperfections exist, criticism will help. We have an open mind in dealing with criticism.

“What we have a difficulty with, is what is happening now, whereby you cannot expect a report to be credible if it is taken from sources known to be hostile to the Government. It loses its credibility.

“We are not saying there are not problems with the Government or that there are not issues with corruption here or there; but in demanding credibility, you yourself must be credible.”
The Central Committee member also stressed that when the PPP/C got into power in 1992, it was on a platform of accountability and transparency. “We must make reference to this: where the country was and where it is today…. It is not that this Government has been sitting on its laurels when it comes to accountability and transparency….

“This country is much better off than it was 20 years ago, but that is not mentioned in the report. It just seems bent on beating the Government on its head and down to its knees, and that is what we have a problem with, not criticism,” he said.

Seeraj agreed that there is an increase in the “perception” of corruption in Guyana, given the misrepresentations in sections of the media. He charged that there is an “obvious” and deliberate effort to increase this perception; and he said that in the political arena, perception is quite often held as reality.

FOCAL POINT
Seeraj also responded to the contention that TIGI was not the body that complied the report, since four independent teams, all part of a mission to Guyana, conducted the research. He said: “No international organisation would send a mission into any jurisdiction without any local arrangements…the mission would not be working in isolation of the local chapter. As a matter of fact, the mission would be using the local chapter as a focal point from which to go out and do the work….the local chapter would have been involved in organising (the mission’s) work, to satisfy the purpose and the objective.
“Our position is that they would have been pointed in directions, and that is what we are questioning: that the base of the information gathering is not as widespread and is not random. It is selective, given the result, given the persons, and (given the) information base that we know of.”

The PPP Central Committee member maintained that there is no isolating the local chapter from the work done to inform the report of Transparency International.

PPP/C General Secretary Clement Rohee, adding his bit, said there is no point in building a “Chinese wall” between the local chapter and the international body, as the local chapter carries the mandate for Transparency International’s work in Guyana.

Rohee explained that, as it relates to prosecuting acts of corruption, due process has to take place. For example, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the National Assembly scrutinizes the Auditor General’s Report and identifies areas for additional investigation to move towards prosecution.
Written By Vanessa Narine