Georgetown: The law provides for criminal penalties for corruption by officials; however, the Guyana government did not implement the law effectively, according to the US State Department 2012 report on Human Rights Practices.
According to the report, there remained a widespread public perception of corruption involving officials at all levels, including the police and the judiciary. The World Bank’s Worldwide Governance Indicators assessed that government corruption was a serious problem.
In October 2011 the Guyana Police Force (GPF) crime chief submitted a report to the minister of home affairs regarding allegations by a senior GPF member that many officers had connections to drug dealers. The minister considered it but took no action by year’s end.
Public officials are subject to financial disclosure laws and are required to submit information about personal assets to the Integrity Commission. Although the Prime Minister, Samuel Hinds stated in June that members would soon be appointed to this commission, it was not functional as of year’s end.
On June 14, the National Assembly approved a government motion that members submit annual declarations in keeping with provisions of the Integrity Act, but compliance was uneven, and the commission had no resources for enforcement or investigations.
The act sets out both criminal and administrative sanctions for non-disclosure. The report disclosed that If a person fails to file a declaration, the fact can be published in the daily newspapers and the official Gazette. Failure to comply with the law can lead to a summary conviction, fines, and imprisonment for six to 12 months.
The US report further noted that the Office of the Auditor General, along with a Public Procurement Commission (PPC) (constitutionally mandated, but never constituted) and the Integrity Commission, were intended to create a framework for government transparency and accountability, but the last two institutions did not play such a role during the year. The Office of the Auditor General scrutinizes the expenditure of public funds on behalf of Parliament and conducts financial audits of all publicly funded entities, including donor-funded entities, local government agencies, and trade unions and reports to the National Assembly. However, the office’s effectiveness remained limited since the government may or may not act on the discrepancies noted in its reports. Observers noted that recurring discrepancies were repeatedly highlighted in the reports without officials taking appropriate follow-up actions to investigate and resolve the discrepancies.
The 2001 constitution called for the establishment of a PPC to monitor public procurement and ensure that authorities conduct the procurement of goods and services in a fair, transparent, competitive, and cost-effective manner. However, the government never constituted the PPC despite public criticism of the present system’s ineffectiveness in awarding government contracts in an equitable and transparent manner. Under pressure from opposition parties in parliament, the government promised to establish the PPC by June; however, it had not done so by year’s end.
A 2011 Access to Information Act, intended to promote transparency and accountability within the government and public institutions, provided for persons to secure access to information under the control of public authorities and for the appointment of a commissioner of information. However, by year’s end the government had not issued implementing regulations nor appointed a commissioner.
In addition, the US report further stated that the Governmental Attitude Regarding International and Nongovernmental Investigation of Alleged Violations of Human Rights
The few organized domestic human rights groups generally operated without government restriction, investigating and publishing their findings on human rights cases. These groups at times complained that government officials were uncooperative and unresponsive to their views and, when they did respond, it was generally to criticize rather than investigate allegations.
Government Human Rights Bodies: The constitution allows for a governmental human rights commission, but authorities never established it. The position of ombudsman, who may investigate any action taken by any government department or authority in relation to the administrative functions of that department or authority, has been vacant since 2005.
You must be logged in to post a comment.