Part I
Introduction
I briefly watched the NCN debate on corruption as it relates to NICIL, and I cannot help but form the impression, as in the case of the earlier debates, that the government is trying its best to present to the nation its version to counter the various allegations of corruption. It selected the topics, the venue and the panelists in such a manner so as to place itself in a position of advantage. During the breaks, NCN showed online comments from viewers and most of these comments, if not all, were pro-government in nature. This raises the issue of whether NCN is not selective in airing these comments. When one views the composition of the panel – in the case of the NICIL debate, two government ,inisters and a senior official of NICIL teaming up against one individual – one can only conclude how one-sided an affair the debates have so far been.
Since the government is an interested party in relation to allegations of corruption, it would have been more appropriate for civil society, such as the Transparency Institute of Guyana Inc or the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Guyana, to arrange for such a debate.
Today, we revisit the NICIL controversy in the light of some of
