Dear Editor,
Reference is made to Joel Bhagwandin’s letter in Stabroek News (July 10, 2023) entitled `Bulkan’s position, supported by Brandli, that the sale of carbon credit is fraudulent is preposterous’. The letter requires a swift response given that several falsehoods are expressed by the author.
Claim 1: “The infamous Oil and Gas Governance Network (OGGN) is a foreign non-governmental organization established by a small group of anti-government activists.”
The facts: OGGN is indeed a registered non-profit organization in New York City, United States with 501(c)(3) status. OGGN clearly states that it has no political association and it works for the benefit of all people of Guyana. According to OGGN’s mission statement, the organization advocates for the rule of law, environmental protection and financial norms with respect to oil exploration and production activities in Guyana (see www.oggn.org/ about). Importantly, OGGN has never made political statements or endorsement in favour or support of any political party in Guyana.
Claim 2: “The position of Bulkan, supported by Brandli, that the sale of carbon credits is fraudulent is preposterous.”
The facts: On the basis of the Amerindian Act, Professor Bulkan has argued that the sale of carbon credits involving forests under jurisdiction of the titled Amerindian villages requires a vote at a village meeting convened according to the Amerindian Act 2006. Two-thirds of the members of each titled village would have to approve to such a deal. To my knowledge, none of these votes required by law have taken place to date. However, if I happen to be misinformed, I would kindly request that Mr. Bhagwandin provide the Guyanese public with a list of the dates of each village meeting addressing the issue of carbon credit sales plus the result of the individual votes. In absence of this evidence, the position that Government of Guyana is acting illegally by selling carbon credits of titled Amerindian villages remains uncontested.
Claim 3: “Andre Brandli who is half Guyanese, resides in Germany.”
The facts: The claim is true. I am the son of a Guyanese mother and a Swiss father and I reside in Germany (and Switzerland). This fact is however irrelevant. The Constitution of Guyana does not distinguish between Guyanese and “half Guyanese”. One is either Guyanese with full civil rights or a foreigner. In fact, all Guyanese apart from the Amerindians have their roots abroad. Guyana’s most famous writer Edgar Mittelholzer is the descendant of a Swiss mercenary in the service of the Dutch colonial administration at the time. Importantly, many Guyanese in the diaspora have one parent that is not of Guyanese origin. This is simply the result of decades of emigration of Guyanese to the US, Canada, or Europe starting with the Windrush generation migrating to the UK after World War II.
More bothersome is the implicit and obvious attempt of the author and other government-friendly writers in the past, such as Dr. Randolph Persaud, the Minister of Natural Resources and the Vice President, to discredit critical voices and to limit the constitutional right of freedom of expression for certain Guyanese citizens, here those in the diaspora. This is deplorable and illegal. In addition, such careless statements effectively undermine the recent efforts of President Ali and the Diaspora Unit in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to encourage Guyanese abroad to engage and invest in development of Guyana.
Claim 4: “Can Janette Bulkan and Prof. Andre Brandli raise at least 1% of the total sum of the proceeds from the carbon sales – from any alternative sources for the Amerindian Communities?”
The facts: The constitutional duty to support the Amerindian communities (as well as those of all other Guyanese) is one of the core responsibilities of the Government of Guyana. For this purpose, the Government is endowed with the right to levy taxes and other duties on the people of Guyana and on businesses, companies, and other legal entities operating under its jurisdiction.
The question however arises whether the Government of Guyana could not have obtained a far better deal for the carbon credits on offer and subsequently sold to Hess Corporation in December 2022? Why was no international auction of the carbon credits carried out and sold to the highest bidder? The government’s approach leading to the sale of carbon credits to Hess Corporation was untransparent and did not allow for other interested parties to participate. In other words, did the Ali administration sell Guyana’s natural resources under price?
Sincerely,
Andre Brandli, PhD
Professor
LMU Munich, German
On behalf of OGGN
