Dear Editor,
I refer to two letters written by Mr Mortimer George which were published on February 28 in the Kaieteur News, Stabroek News and Guyana Chronicle, and then in Kaieteur News on March 1 and the Guyana Chronicle on March 16.
In these letters it appears that Mr George either made valiant efforts to highlight issues that were more pertinent to his apparent aims of upholding the favourable image of particular members of the Berbice Cricket Board (BCB), namely Angela Haniff and company, or he has been out of touch with the realities of the circumstances and situations pertaining to the BCB, Ms Haniff and colleagues.
Surely, one would expect Mr George to be cognizant of principle, ethical guidelines and legal implications surrounding matters of interest to the Berbice Cricket Board and Ms Haniff.
It is hoped that he would be aware that the BCB is a corporate body, established under the Guyana Cricket Administration Act No 14 of 2014; that it held its last Annual General Meeting (AGM) in December, 2014. This means that for almost three years, there has been no further AGM of the BCB. Further, he should be cognizant that the BCB rented office space for decades, going way back to the days of Mr Leslie Amsterdam. This fact becomes important, since on whose authority does the secretary have to transfer BCB assets?
On this basis, it must be acknowledged that Ms Haniff was elected as secretary at the said 2014 AGM, and had rightfully assumed her position. However, individuals are not likely to concur that authority would be invested in the secretary of the BCB, to transfer previous BCB assets into her own name. One is likely to find it disheartening that a land telephone formerly assigned to the BCB would be apparently be transferred to Ms Haniff.
So discouraging is such a conceptualization when one considers that the BCB was paying for all telephone bills, that the BCB was not informed of such a transfer, and that payments were allowed to be continually made on the bill.
Further, it is even more demoralizing and depressing when one recognizes that the lease for the BCB has been apparently unilaterally transferred to Ms Haniff. At some stage, one must ask themselves whether Ms Haniff and the Berbice Board are one and the same? Certainly not!
Are other executives aware of these actions? I am not.
However, Ms Haniff continues to seemingly act in ways that question her authority to function legitimately and transparently, for on what basis could Angela Haniff refuse direct instructions from the vice president of the BCB to prepare an asset register and to hand over assets to the BCB?
Above all, it is saddening to know that Ms Haniff has apparently refused to release documents belonging to the BCB, regardless of the authority of personnel requesting her to do so. Ms Haniff and her collaborators must not be allowed to act autonomously when the BCB has an established structure. The disorderliness should stop.
I would like to make it clear that my objective for Berbice cricket is to produce cricketers not to become popular or use the BCB to as a charity to enrich myself.
The BCB, as per its constitution appended to the Cricket Administration Bill, consists of member clubs and associations. It does not provide for individuals to be members and certainly not for life. It also reminds me that the last two presidents failed to read the bill since their clubs are not members of the BCB, which is an oversight. I look forward to correcting this situation at my first meeting. Mr George needs to read the entire Cricket Administration Act, not parts of it.
We are in the process of conducting a financial and asset audit, so more may be discovered. I am already aware that the BCB is broke since the GCB was approached to pay for the audit.
Mr George and his cohorts can continue to write letters, but we will run cricket for the benefit of the kids in Berbice.
Yours faithfully,
Dhieranidranauth Somwaru
1st Vice President BCB (elected)
President (ag) BCB
