On Thursday a fireworks explosion at the GDF base in Timehri killed three soldiers and injured two others. This is the second time in just over two months that army personnel have been killed and injured as a consequence of an explosion involving fireworks. Particularly concerning is the fact that the explosives came from the same consignment which caused the death of one rank and injuries to seven others at the Coastguard headquarters in Ruimveldt on February 22.
On that occasion it was while soldiers were offloading the fireworks from a truck that the explosion occurred. They were to be used for the midnight display commemorating the nation’s 50th Republic anniversary, but following the accident this segment of the celebrations was cancelled. President David Granger described the occurrence as “something which is completely unexpected, particularly because of the level of training and professionalism of the soldiers who were involved … These are experts. These are some people who have done fireworks overseas. When Barbados had their 50th Anniversary of Independence in 2016, some of the very persons involved went to Barbados.”
Since a lack of professionalism was not the cause of the blast, he hazarded that what had gone wrong might have been, “One bomb. And it might have triggered a chain effect.” He also said that it was customary for the army to employ the “best safety” measures to ensure that the lives of its personnel were not put in danger. For his part Chief-of-Staff Patrick West told reporters that there had been rehearsals with the fireworks, and no issues had arisen at that time. He also said a Board of Inquiry would be set up to establish what had happened.
Exactly what came out of that inquiry has never been revealed, because the report was not made public. No one knows, therefore, either the underlying causes of the explosion, or what recommendations were made in relation to the remaining fireworks. Inevitably, however, it has been announced that there will be yet another Board of Inquiry, which will, one presumes, look at the findings of the first board and investigate whether any of these should have been implemented before the order for the demolition of the explosives was given. If there were recommendations which were ignored, there should be consequences.
What the public will want to know first of all is what the source of these fireworks was, and whether they originated from reputable suppliers. Furthermore, how long had they been in the possession of the GDF, and did they have some kind of expiry date? Guyana of course is a hot, humid territory, so was this particular brand of fireworks designed to function in this climate, or if they were, was their shelf-life more limited than might have been the case in a north temperate zone? Were there any warnings about this, or were there any other cautions attached to the set which should have been noted? If there were, at what level was attention paid to these?
The most recent deaths occurred while the fireworks were being prepared for demolition at the GDF’s Arms Store Complex, and while President Granger in February laid great emphasis on the expertise of the handlers, where this second accident is concerned, it is not clear what level of training those detailed for the execution of this task had. Of those who died two were lance-corporals and one was a private, while of the injured, one was a sergeant and the other a lance-corporal, although an army source told this newspaper that the GDF does have senior demolition experts. In addition thereto, the source said, the Engineers Battalion should not have been the lead unit in this particular exercise, as this type of ordnance falls under the Support Services Battalion.
Perhaps more concerning for the relatives and the public was whether the men had been issued with protective gear. From the harrowing pictures seen by this newspaper as well as from the reports of relatives who viewed the dead, it does not appear that they were. We quoted Mr Rixon Peneux, for example, the brother of victim, Tooney Peneux, as saying, “I think the army needs to answer and tell us why they didn’t wear any [protective gear]”.
These explosives were clearly unstable, so did the GDF not consider it important to ensure that special safety measures were in place so the lives of their soldiers would not be placed in jeopardy when the fireworks were disposed of? Or is it that they followed President Granger’s hypothesis and came to the conclusion it was just one defective “bomb” in the consignment which had triggered a chain reaction? If so, were those who died and were injured even issued with standard (not special) safety equipment which the disposal of these kinds of explosives might normally require?
And what was the view of the Board of Inquiry; did it recommend any special safety measures which should be taken? As earlier cited, President Granger was reported as saying that it was customary for the army to employ “best safety” measures in relation to its soldiers. The question is, was that the case in this instance?
