GEORGETOWN, Guyana, CMC – The Guyana Human Rights Association (GHRA) has denied claims by Attorney General Anil Nandlall that it owes the state more than GUY$38.6 million (One Guyana dollar = US$0.006).
And it has challenged Nandlall to provide evidence that his allegation is not a “reprisal” for the GHRA raising concerns about the process of Guyana’s Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative.
As you know, a fundamental requirement of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) states that ‘stakeholders, including but not limited to members of the multi-stakeholder group, must be able to operate freely and express opinions about the EITI without restraint, coercion or reprisal.’
“The current action against the GHRA smacks of reprisal, and dispelling such impressions requires convincing evidence that it is routine rather than targeted,” GHRA’s Co-President Mike Mc Cormack said in a statement on Thursday.
Nandlall had claimed that the GHRA was in breach of the Companies Act under which it has been registered for the past 40 years, creating a debt of some GUY$ 38.6 million to the Guyana government.
“The GHRA roundly rejects this allegation,” the association said.
“Given the public manner in which this charge has been made in your name, it would be equally in the public interest for your response on the matter to be given a similar level of publicity, particularly for the benefit of other organizations that may be vulnerable to comparable treatment.”
The GHRA questioned what steps the Attorney-General’s Chamber took in 1991, or more recently, to ensure that all of the companies and organizations on the original Companies Register were adequately informed of the changes they were required to make to remain compliant.
“This is particularly relevant given that NGOs such as the GHRA were forced to register under the original Companies Act due to the absence of legal recognition of the concept of non-profit,” it said.
“The first audited accounts of the GHRA were for the year 1980 and the last for 2020, along with all forty years in between. What steps has the AG’s Chambers taken to address the legion of organizations of every description functioning without audits of any description, including official bodies?
“Since the alleged breach was never raised during the 23 years the PPP was in office during 1992-2015, what factors prompted the current search that produced one non-compliant organization? What steps has the Attorney-General’s Chambers taken to legally recognize the category of non-profit organizations to end the long-standing dysfunctionality,” it added.
In a statement, the Office of the Attorney General had said that the GHRA failed to apply for Continuance under Part IV, Division B of the Companies Act and therefore owes the state.
It added that contrary to the organization’s claim of having all its “ducks in a row,” the company has not been in good standing for nearly three decades.
The government has been critical of the human rights group commenting on national issues, accusing the GHRA of “masquerading as an exemplary civil society organization” and continuing to “deceive the nation as it relates to its legitimacy.”
and then  has denied claims by Attorney General Anil Nandlall that it owes the state more than){kind=link}