标签： Guyana

On Tuesday, 28 July 2026, Guyana’s top prosecutorial official Shalimar Hack, Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), has stood by the decision to file murder charges against three crew members of the ferry MV Barima, while openly acknowledging the vessel had critical flaws in its navigation and safety infrastructure. The case has sparked sharp debate over the legal grounding of the charges and their potential impact on an upcoming independent public inquiry into the tragedy.

Hacking explained that the decision to pursue murder charges followed a comprehensive review of available evidence, applicable legal principles, binding precedent from the United Kingdom, Commonwealth legal jurisdictions, the European Court of Human Rights, and broader public policy priorities. Notably, she did not directly address the core legal requirements for a murder conviction: proving criminal intent and malice aforethought against the three accused — 40-year-old captain Kevin Price of Melanie Damishana, East Coast Demerara; 42-year-old chief mate Rondell Dwayne Roberts of Grove Public Road, East Bank Demerara; and 33-year-old goods superintendent Delon Granderson of Fellowship, West Coast Demerara.

Earlier the same day, defense attorneys Nigel Hughes and Darren Wade publicly raised urgent concerns over what they described as the fundamental weakness of the murder charges. The pair also questioned the timing and motive of the charges ahead of the upcoming Commission of Inquiry (COI), which will be led by a panel of Caribbean and international maritime experts.

In a public Facebook post, Hughes outlined a key critique: if the three accused are formally charged with murder, they are likely to exercise their right to remain silent during the COI, out of concern that any testimony they give could be used as evidence against them in the subsequent criminal trial. This would leave critical questions about the tragedy unanswered before the inquiry, he argued.

Hacking pushed back against these concerns, emphasizing that the upcoming independent inquiry established by Guyana’s President will not interfere with the criminal prosecution. She noted that parallel proceedings have functioned successfully in previous high-profile Guyanese cases, including 2018 piracy charges connected to the Berbice incident and fraud charges stemming from the 2020 Regional and General Elections, pointing to precedent for simultaneous processes.

“Given the unprecedented magnitude of this matter, coupled with public interest factors, the prosecution will be conducted with due consideration of the work of the Commission of Inquiry,” Hack added.

Under Article 187 of the Constitution of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions is an independent body that operates free from direction or control by any other government authority or individual. The DPP holds statutory authority to initiate and oversee criminal proceedings against any person accused of violating Guyanese law, and maintains full control over all such prosecutorial processes.

In line with these constitutional powers, Hack confirmed that her office conducted a full review of the investigative file compiled by the Guyana Police Force into the MV Barima tragedy, and formally advised law enforcement to file the murder charges that are now the subject of public controversy.

On Monday, July 27 2026, Guyana’s National Assembly descended into chaotic disruption as a unified bloc of opposition lawmakers staged a mass protest to demand bipartisan concessions for an independent public inquiry into the sinking of the MV Barima ferry, a disaster that has left an estimated 100 people dead off the country’s Essequibo Coast.

The July 18 sinking, which claimed the lives of scores of people—including more than 20 children, a majority of whom were Indigenous Amerindians—has sparked escalating anger at the ruling government over what critics call systemic neglect and a lack of accountability. The tragedy has put senior cabinet members under intense pressure to step down to make way for an unobstructed investigation.

Led by the three main opposition groups—We Invest in Nationhood (WIN), A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and Forward Guyana Movement (FGM)—all opposition parliamentarians boycotted scheduled government business, including consideration of a GY$54.89 billion supplementary budget request and debate on the Guyana Development Bank Bill. When Speaker Manzoor Nadir called on opposition legislators to submit pre-scheduled questions to cabinet ministers, the lawmakers refused to respond.

Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed rejected the Speaker’s offer of a five-minute address to the 65-seat chamber over the tragedy, telling reporters ahead of the sitting that the opposition would not stand by and allow what he called “wicked, deceitful and treacherous” conduct to violate the rights of affected Guyanese citizens. “We’ve had the biggest tragedy in Guyana, and no one should expect that business must go on as usual,” explained APNU parliamentary leader Dr. Terrence Campbell, confirming the opposition was acting as a unified bloc to force the government to abandon its routine agenda and prioritize the inquiry. “We are signalling to the government that it cannot be business as usual,” he added.

Protesting lawmakers chanted demands for the resignations of two senior cabinet members: Public Works Minister Juan Edghill and Deodat Indar, the minister responsible for Guyana’s Maritime Administration (MARAD). The demonstrators banged on parliamentary tables and advanced toward the lectern where Attorney General Anil Nandlall was delivering a statement on the government’s response to the sinking on behalf of President Irfaan Ali and Prime Minister Mark Phillips, who was also present to outline the official timeline of events following the initial distress call.

Nadir twice suspended the parliamentary sitting to open dialogue with the opposition, but the demonstrators refused to end their disruption. Each time the sitting resumed, opposition lawmakers closed in on government leaders at the lectern, forcing ruling party parliamentarians to form a protective shield around Nandlall and Phillips. Parliament’s Sergeant-at-Arms and two assistants were eventually called in to establish a buffer between the protesting opposition and the prime minister. Opposition legislators also occupied seating reserved for cabinet ministers during the budget consideration process, forcing the Speaker to reassign the ministers to alternate seats, while ruling party lawmakers positioned themselves around the chamber to anticipate further direct action from protesters.

When Edghill left the Arthur Chung Conference Centre, which hosts the National Assembly sittings, he told reporters he would address calls for his resignation “at the appropriate time” as a small group of female supporters stood with him to offer comfort.

The unrest was not limited to the parliamentary chamber. Outside the conference centre in Liliendaal, a small group of civilian protesters gathered to picket in solidarity with the opposition’s demands. Among them were Annette Ferguson, a former APNU+Alliance For Change parliamentarian, and prominent Indigenous Amerindian rights activist Laura George. George extended the opposition’s resignation calls to two Indigenous Amerindian cabinet ministers, Sarah Brown and Pauline Sukhai, noting that the majority of the ferry sinking victims were Indigenous people.

“We lost more than 23 Guyanese children whose futures were taken away,” George told Demerara Waves, adding that the two Indigenous ministers cannot claim exemption from accountability for the tragedy. “As part of cabinet, we have Indigenous ministers. They also must be held accountable so I don’t want them to feel they are protected and insulated from this call for accountability. They are as culpable for this neglect of Indigenous Peoples—also as Indigenous women and mothers—so the call is for them to resign.” George also pointed to a striking lack of government action ahead of the disaster, noting that cabinet has met more than 300 times since 2020, yet the approval to launch the ferry for commercial service was never brought up for public discussion or scrutiny.

Despite the widespread opposition protest and external public pressure, the ruling government has pushed forward with its scheduled legislative agenda, refusing to concede to demands for a bipartisan agreement on the terms of reference for the public inquiry before continuing other parliamentary business.

In a major trade action announced Thursday, the United States has implemented a 12.5 percent additional tariff on nearly all exports from the South American nation of Guyana, triggering an immediate pushback from Guyanese officials who deny any systemic forced labor in the country’s supply chains.

The new tariff measure, announced by U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, places Guyana among 60 trading partners facing higher tariffs for what Washington describes as a “failure to impose and effectively enforce a prohibition on the importation of goods produced with forced labor.” The punitive step caps years of investigation by the USTR, a process that included two rounds of public hearings, more than 2,100 public submissions from stakeholders, and direct diplomatic engagement with affected nations to address longstanding U.S. concerns about forced labor in global supply chains.

In an official statement following the announcement, Ambassador Greer emphasized that decades of informal diplomatic pressure had failed to eliminate forced labor from cross-border supply chains. “The United States has had a forced labor import ban for nearly a century, and rigorously enforces it; it’s well past time for our trading partners to do the same,” Greer said. He framed the new tariffs as a corrective measure that addresses both a widespread human rights abuse and a market-distorting trade practice, with the ultimate goal of improving working conditions for laborers worldwide. Greer also noted that he welcomed progress from trading partners that have already adopted forced labor import prohibitions, and looks forward to verifying their effective enforcement going forward.

USTR’s multi-month review process included the analysis of more than 1,600 written public comments on the proposed tariff plan, followed by three days of in-person public hearings from July 7 to 9, where more than 100 witnesses delivered testimony and answered questions from agency officials.

But Guyanese officials have pushed back strongly against the U.S. action, rejecting the premise that Guyana tolerates forced labor in its domestic production or trade. Sharon Roopchand-Edwards, Permanent Secretary of Guyana’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, told a USTR public hearing earlier this year that any allegations of forced labor must be resolved through lawful, evidence-based investigations, rather than broad punitive tariffs.

“To date, the Government of Guyana is not aware of evidence demonstrating that goods produced through forced labour are being manufactured in, imported into, or exported from Guyana,” Roopchand-Edwards told the hearing. She emphasized that Guyana shares the U.S. commitment to protecting core labor rights and eradicating forced labor globally, pointing to a robust domestic legal and institutional framework already in place to prevent the practice.

Backing up the government’s position with domestic enforcement data, Roopchand-Edwards noted that as of June 2026, Guyana’s Ministry of Labour had completed more than 2,000 targeted inspections across all major economic sectors, and had not found any substantiated evidence of systemic forced labor. The Guyana Revenue Authority has also not detected any forced labor-produced goods entering the country through imports, she added.

Under existing Guyanese law, Roopchand-Edwards explained, customs authorities already have the legal authority to block imports of goods confirmed to be produced by forced labor. The country’s constitution and national legislation, including the Combating of Trafficking in Persons Act, explicitly ban forced labor, and Guyana is also bound by its obligations under International Labour Organization (ILO) Conventions 29 and 105, which globally prohibit forced and compulsory labor.

Guyana has formally requested that the U.S. reverse the new tariff penalties, and offered full cooperation on any specific, verified cases of forced labor that U.S. authorities can present. Roopchand-Edwards added that Guyana would welcome capacity-building support, information sharing, and exchanges of best practices from the U.S. to strengthen the country’s existing detection and enforcement mechanisms.

She also noted the deep existing economic ties between the two nations: U.S. exports to Guyana have grown steadily over the past two decades, and American firms hold a major market position across Guyana’s economy, most notably in the fast-growing energy sector. “These facts demonstrate that U.S. commerce is neither restricted nor burdened in the Guyanese market,” she said, adding that the two countries are already in active discussions to finalize a reciprocal trade agreement that covers labor standards, including protocols for forced labor-produced goods. Roopchand-Edwards urged U.S. officials to reconsider the tariff penalties before they enter into force.

On the evening of July 22, 2026, five female civil society activists attended a government-organized vigil at Georgetown’s Kingston Seawall, gathered to honor victims of the deadly MV Barima ferry disaster. What began as a peaceful demonstration demanding government accountability has now escalated into a planned constitutional challenge against the Guyanese state, after three members of the group were arrested, detained, and allegedly assaulted by local law enforcement.

The activists had positioned themselves on the periphery of the official event, holding silent signs calling for the resignation and criminal prosecution of Public Works Minister Juan Edghill, whom they hold responsible for the preventable tragedy. Throughout the vigil, the group maintained orderly conduct, never disrupting proceedings, blocking access, or harassing other attendees. According to their official joint statement, no event participant raised any complaints about their presence for the first hour of the gathering. When the group moved to stand behind a large event banner, however, officers from the Guyana Police Force approached and ordered them to leave the location. When the activists asked to be told which law they had violated, police were unable to cite any specific regulation.

Choosing to avoid disrupting the vigil, the activists began returning to their original peripheral position, but police escalated the confrontation, arresting Sherlina Nageer, Salima Bacchus-Hinds, and Romola Lucas. Officers claimed the women held “illegal signs” and had not obtained official permission to protest, forcibly dragging Nageer to the Brickdam Police Station at Eve Leary. The three detainees were processed and released that night on their own recognizance, with a summons to return the next morning to meet with the regional police commander. The following day, police dropped all pending charges and extended an apology to the activists – but the group has rejected the gesture as insufficient and insincere.

Nageer, speaking publicly after the incident, described the apology as conditional and dismissive, noting senior officers offered it only on the basis of “if you think you deserve an apology.” For the activists, a formal apology does not address the core harm of arbitrary detention and constitutional rights violations. “The assault and rights violation are real, actual serious things, and saying you’re ‘sorry and just get out of my office’ does not match the scale of what happened,” Nageer told Demerara Waves Online News.

The group is currently seeking legal counsel to file a constitutional challenge at the Guyana High Court, aiming to set a legal precedent that prevents law enforcement from violating citizens’ fundamental rights to peaceful assembly in the future. If the suit moves forward, its core goal will be to legally bar police from arbitrary arrests and forced removals of peaceful protestors from public gatherings. The activists emphasize that Guyana’s constitution explicitly protects the right to peaceful assembly, association, and demonstration under Article 147, which states that “no person shall be hindered in the enjoyment of his or her freedom of assembly, association and freedom to demonstrate peacefully.”

Alongside the planned constitutional lawsuit, the group has submitted an official complaint to the Guyana Police Force’s Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), which confirmed that OPR representatives received them well during an initial meeting this week.

In their joint statement, the activists characterized the verbal harassment, physical abuse, and arbitrary detention of the three women as a clear case of state overreach and abuse of power that threatens the constitutional rights of all Guyanese citizens. They have rejected attempts to intimidate them into silence, calling on all Guyanese to speak out against the gradual erosion of constitutional and human rights by government and law enforcement officials, and to join their demand for full and lasting accountability.

Beyond the confrontation with police, the group has reaffirmed their core demands related to the MV Barima disaster: they continue to call for Edghill’s resignation and full criminal accountability, an independent and transparent public investigation into the tragedy, and a complete overhaul of Guyana’s coastal and inland public transportation systems. The activists argue that the ferry disaster was entirely preventable, caused by systemic failures including inadequate oversight, ignored safety protocols, failure to complete necessary port infrastructure, and delays in commissioning modern, safe ferry vessels. “Persons must not suffer and die because they are unable to afford a plane ticket, because systems lack oversight, protocols are ignored, stellings not built, and more modern ferries not commissioned in a timely manner,” their statement read.