Anonymity in public affairs

The intended purpose was to ensure that the public could obtain information about the people’s business and many of the hidden dealings would be brought to light.

Unfortunately, the people who have the most to hide are the ones who have succeeded in finding ways to ensure that these transactions remain secret. They have made an art of disguising their dealings and using the privacy argument to keep them secret.

Not long ago a particular company was found in possession of large tracts of State lands and when questions were asked the relevant minister at first pretended ignorance.

He subsequently admitted that the company did in fact take over the land but could give no information about the arrangements and hid behind the privacy excuse.

To date, this company, which was in receipt of huge contracts from the State on which it has defaulted, has not been called to answer how it obtained the lands and what were the conditions governing the arrangement.

Even more recently, the national oil company refused to provide information to the joint parliamentary committee on State enterprises on a particular transaction on the grounds of alleged confidentiality.

The transaction remains secret although again it is the people’s business and this is the committee established by the highest court in the land specifically to enquire into these matters.

It appears that any time a public agency is unable to answer questions or has something to hide they run to the confidentiality excuse as a copout.

So long as these people are allowed to get away with this excuse the country will never be able to deal with the scourge of corruption.

Karan Mahabirsingh Carapichaima