A notice has been issued calling on audiences to tune into a live broadcast. However, at the time of this announcement, no additional context, specific details regarding the subject of the live stream, participating individuals, scheduled air time or location have been released to the public. This brief notification leaves potential viewers without critical information needed to plan to watch the live event, and it remains unclear when further details about the broadcast will be made available.
作者: admin
-

UWI Vice-Chancellor’s report broadcast set for May 8
The University of the West Indies (UWI) has announced that its Vice-Chancellor, Professor Sir Hilary Beckles, will present his official annual report covering the 2024/2025 academic year to the institution’s top governing body, the University Council, in a publicly accessible live broadcast on Friday, May 8, 2026.
Per an official statement released by the regional higher education institution, Professor Beckles’ presentation will lay out the university’s most important milestones from the past academic year, a full review of the institution’s overall performance, and its planned strategic trajectory for the coming years. The report will specifically highlight UWI’s ongoing work to advance its core long-term priorities: strengthening institutional resilience to navigate shifting educational and economic landscapes, building capacity to address emerging global and regional challenges, and expanding the university’s impact and standing across the Caribbean and worldwide.
As the highest governing authority in the UWI system, the University Council holds responsibility for supervising all of the university’s administrative and operational affairs, including the appointment of senior leadership. The body is currently chaired by Chancellor Dodridge Miller, who oversees the Council’s deliberations and formal decision-making processes.
To make this key annual governance event accessible to students, faculty, alumni, and members of the public across the region, the full proceedings will be broadcast live via UWItv. The broadcast is scheduled to kick off at 10:00 a.m. Atlantic Standard Time (Eastern Caribbean time) and 9:00 a.m. Eastern Standard Time (Jamaica time). Interested viewers can stream the event live through the official UWItv website at www.uwitv.global, or access the broadcast on UWItv via FLOW EVO cable television services.
-

No irregularities in Venezuela-Guyana boundary dispute settlement process – Guyana tells World Court
On Monday, 4 May 2026, oral proceedings on the merits of the long-running Guyana-Venezuela border dispute kicked off at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), with Guyana formally dismissing decades of Venezuelan claims alleging procedural irregularity and foul play in the 1899 territorial settlement that granted Guyana control over the resource-rich Essequibo Region.
Venezuela’s core challenges to the dispute’s legal framework center on two key documents: the 1897 Treaty of Arbitration between Caracas and the United Kingdom, which established the process to resolve the boundary conflict, and the 1899 Arbitral Tribunal Award that allocated the Essequibo territory to what would later become Guyana. Caracas claims the 1897 deal was negotiated without its full consent, included coercive pressure, and contained procedural flaws that ultimately led to an unjust 1899 ruling that stripped Venezuela of the territory.
Appearing before the ICJ panel of judges on Guyana’s behalf, lead counsel Paul Reichler systematically refuted every one of Venezuela’s allegations, backing his arguments with declassified contemporary correspondence between Venezuela, the United Kingdom and the United States. Reichler emphasized that Venezuela has no legitimate legal or factual basis to invalidate either the 1897 Treaty or the 1899 arbitral award.
Reichler also outlined the long history of the dispute, noting that Venezuela publicly accepted, respected and abided by the 1899 award for more than 60 years before formally challenging its validity in a 1962 letter to the United Nations Secretary-General. Crucially, Reichler added, even when Venezuela reversed its position on the 1899 award, it continued to recognize the 1897 Treaty as a binding legal agreement in subsequent UN submissions – a contradiction that undermines its current challenge to the treaty’s validity.
Reichler dismissed Venezuelan claims that the United States colluded with the United Kingdom to advance British interests at Venezuela’s expense. He pointed to surviving contemporary documentary evidence that directly contradicts allegations that the 1897 treaty was negotiated behind Venezuela’s back, without input from Venezuelan representatives, or that it ignored Caracas’ core interests. He confirmed that the final text of the 1897 Treaty fully incorporated Venezuela’s position on both the legal principle of prescription and the continuing validity of the 1850 bilateral agreement, and that contemporary records show Venezuela explicitly agreed that the United States had properly protected its interests during negotiations.
Another key Venezuelan claim is that the 1897 Treaty was reached without its full consent and barred it from appointing its own arbitrator to the tribunal. Reichler labeled this argument as entirely groundless, citing archival records showing the draft treaty shared with Caracas in November 1896 explicitly addressed arbitrator appointments. Under Article Two of the final treaty, the five-member tribunal would have two members nominated by the U.S. Supreme Court, two by the British High Court of Justice, and a fifth appointed by the four nominees. The structure left open the explicit possibility that U.S. justices would nominate a Venezuelan candidate – a provision that British negotiators openly opposed, Reichler confirmed.
On Venezuela’s argument that the 1897 Treaty was signed under coercion, a violation of Article 52 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Reichler noted that the convention’s provisions do not apply retroactively to agreements concluded decades before the treaty entered into force. He also rejected Venezuela’s claims that the alleged Anglo-American conspiracy amounts to fraud under Article 49 of the convention, as well as claims that Venezuela ratified the 1897 Treaty under a mistake of fact, as defined in Article 48, after being told the agreement protected its interests only to see those interests sidelined during the 1899 arbitration.
Reichler confirmed that while the 1897 arbitration agreement was primarily negotiated directly by then-British Ambassador to the U.S. Lord Pauncefote and U.S. Secretary of State Richard Olney on Venezuela’s behalf, Caracas raised no objections to the negotiation process at the time.
Guyana’s full delegation to the ICJ hearing includes Foreign Minister Hugh Todd, Attorney General Anil Nandlall, Guyana’s Agent to the ICJ Carl Greenidge, and Donnette Streete, Director of Frontiers at the Guyanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The ICJ’s merits hearing will now proceed, with Venezuela expected to present its own arguments in the coming days, as the court works to resolve a territorial conflict that has lingered for more than a century.
-

Guyana tells World Court that Spain or Venezuela never ran Essequibo
On Monday, 4 May 2026, legal and diplomatic representatives of Guyana laid out a comprehensive, evidence-backed case before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), refuting Venezuela’s long-standing territorial claim to the 160,000-square-kilometer Essequibo region by documenting Guyana’s continuous, uninterrupted administration of the territory and challenging the legitimacy of Venezuela’s legal arguments.
This week marks a critical milestone in the decades-long border dispute, as the ICJ convenes to hear the merits of Guyana’s case centered on the legal validity of the 1899 Arbitral Tribunal Award, the original agreement that formalized the land boundary between the two neighboring South American nations.
Speaking on behalf of Guyana’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Donnette Streete, Director of the Frontiers Division, told the UN’s highest judicial body that neither historical colonial power Spain nor modern Venezuela ever exercised governing control over Essequibo. Streete outlined the territory’s deep demographic and administrative ties to Guyana, noting that Dutch settlers were the first Europeans to occupy the region, which was later populated by descendants of enslaved Africans and indentured Asian workers brought to the area by Dutch and British colonial rulers between the 17th and 19th centuries. Today, Essequibo is fully integrated into Guyana’s national governance: the region elects nine representatives to Guyana’s national parliament, Guyana collects all regional taxes, manages public services, and leads conservation efforts to protect the area’s extraordinary biodiversity. According to Guyana’s 2022 national census, more than 313,000 people call Essequibo home – accounting for over one-third of the country’s total population, including nine indigenous groups that have inhabited the land long before the formation of modern national borders.
Carl Greenidge, Guyana’s lead agent before the ICJ for the case, supported Streete’s arguments with extensive cartographic and historical evidence. He presented maps demonstrating that the farthest eastern Spanish colonial outposts never reached Essequibo, sitting roughly 650 kilometers outside the region’s boundaries. To further prove early Dutch administrative control, Greenidge highlighted that 35 locations across Essequibo still retain their original Dutch place names to this day.
Greenidge walked the court through the documented timeline of European settlement: “Post-Columbian history of what is now Guyana begins with the arrival of the Dutch in 1598, the first Europeans to establish permanent settlements in the territory. By 1616, they had formally founded the Colony of Essequibo, constructed Fort Kykoveral along the Mazaruni River – west of the Essequibo River – as their official seat of government, and began administering the territory stretching west all the way to the Orinoco River. Five years later, in 1621, the Dutch West India Company took over formal governance of the colony, and the administrative capital was relocated to Fort Zealandia in 1744.”
He emphasized that Spanish colonial forces never established a presence east of the Orinoco, where Essequibo is located: “The Spanish were nowhere to be found, not east of the Orinoco, at any rate. Their nearest outpost was San Tome on the banks of the Orinoco, the easternmost Spanish settlement ever established. The Spanish Governor of that outpost was candid about his inability to extend control further east, writing that the settlement was already far too distant from all other Spanish positions to expand governance.”
Earlier in the day, Guyana’s Foreign Minister Hugh Todd opened the proceedings by calling on Venezuela to commit to abiding by the ICJ’s final ruling. “Guyana reiterates its pledge to honor and comply with the court’s judgment whatever it may be, as it is bound to do in any event by the United Nations Charter and the Statute of the court. Guyana hopes that Venezuela would make the same pledge,” Todd stated.
Leading international public international law expert Pierre d’Argent, one of Guyana’s legal team members, grounded the case in prior ICJ precedent. He referenced the court’s 2020 and 2023 rulings on preliminary matters in the dispute, noting that Venezuela has never directly challenged the long-standing legal principle of res judicata – the rule that finalized court judgments are binding. D’Argent added that Venezuela has not filed a formal application for review under Article 61 of the ICJ Statute, the only legal pathway to challenge a binding res judicata ruling. “It must be concluded therefore that Venezuela has not discovered any new fact of such a nature that, had it been known earlier, would be a decisive factor on the conclusions reached by the court in its judgments of 2020 and 2023,” d’Argent argued. “In these conditions, these judgments remain res judicata for the parties and for the court itself.”
Another senior member of Guyana’s legal team, Paul Reichler, reminded the court that Venezuela itself accepted, respected, and complied with the 1899 Arbitral Award for more than 60 years after it was issued. Venezuela only first formally challenged the award’s validity in February 1962, in a letter from its Permanent Representative to the UN Secretary-General. At that time, Reichler noted, Venezuela explicitly reaffirmed that it still recognized the 1897 border treaty – the agreement that established the original arbitral process – as a valid binding international treaty. It was not until 1963, 66 years after Venezuela ratified the 1897 treaty, that the country first raised objections to the treaty itself.
-

President roept jongeren op kansen te benutten na komst stroom Langu-gebied
A landmark renewable energy development in Suriname has brought permanent, round-the-clock electricity to 1,300 households in the rural Boven-Suriname region, following the official inauguration of a new solar power facility in the Langu area by President Jennifer Simons.
During the opening ceremony held on Sunday, President Simons emphasized that reliable access to energy is a foundational requirement for driving inclusive development across Suriname’s inland territories. She used the occasion to call on local young people to seize the new opportunities unlocked by consistent electricity access. “Take this chance to study harder and build meaningful futures for yourselves in our society,” the president told attendees. For other community members, she highlighted that the new power infrastructure can also be leveraged to grow local economic activity, encouraging residents to develop community-led initiatives such as eco-tourism camps to foster self-sufficient local growth.
The president noted that expanding electricity access across Suriname’s inland regions has been a years-long priority for the government. Planning for the broader electrification initiative first launched in 2019, with the core goal of delivering continuous power across the entire Boven-Suriname area. This newly completed solar facility forms part of the second phase of the national Suriname Villages Micro-grid Solar Project. According to the Suriname Communication Service, the construction and implementation of the project is being carried out by two experienced Chinese state-owned energy infrastructure firms, PowerChina and Sinohydro.
David Abiamofo, Suriname’s Minister of Natural Resources, outlined that the administration’s policy focuses on delivering long-term, structural solutions to improve living standards in inland communities. “The development we are pursuing for the interior is not just occasional access to power – it is 24-hour electricity every single day,” Abiamofo stated. He also expressed praise for the progress the government has delivered on this agenda, noting that “they say self-praise is unseemly, but I want to compliment the government of Suriname. Since we began work from Atjoni, almost all villages now have access to 24/7 power, and today it is Langu’s turn to benefit.”
Moving forward, Minister Abiamofo confirmed that the government is actively pursuing additional funding from regional and international development organizations to support further infrastructure projects across inland areas, acknowledging that public funding alone is not sufficient to deliver all planned improvements. Following the completion of the electrification project, the government’s next priority for the Langu area and surrounding communities is upgrading access to clean drinking water. In total, 26 villages across the region will gain access to safe, reliable drinking water through the upcoming initiative, and work on the water project is already underway, with the minister asking local communities for a small amount of additional patience as construction progresses.





