Dear Editor,
Thank you for affording me the opportunity to respond to a letter from Martin Cheong captioned “What criteria are used to determine the size of Amerindian grants?” (07.10.05) Since such negative and shallow utterances can mislead the public, I thank you for the opportunity to provide a response.
Concerning the criteria, I wish to note that the procedure and the requirements for granting Amerindian communities titled lands are stated clearly in the Amerindian Act of 2006. Indeed, these were considered by a Select Committee of Parliament which comprised opposition members. Moreover, such procedures are very rare in law since governments prefer to have policies that can be easily manipulated rather than enact laws. The government of Guyana opted to ensure that once and for all Amerindian communities are clear on how land claims can be settled. I should also point out that in many countries once a land claim is determined by the government the decision is final. In Guyana the communities have another option if they are displeased with the decision. Fortunately for Guyana, and unlike Mr Cheong, the Amerindian communities and the majority of the leaders see cooperation and mutual respect as a means of settling land claims. It is for this reason that we have been able to settle 19 land claims and have also addressed 6 extensions of land already titled, resulting in the doubling of Amerindian lands in just 4 years. In all of these cases there were mutual agreements. If that is “dictatorship” then Mr. Cheong has compiled his own dictionary. I should also note that prior to this government, there was absolutely no consultation with Amerindian communities on lands to be titled. Today this is a pre-requisite to granting lands. Our indigenous brothers and sisters in other parts of the world could only dream of such developments.
Mr Cheong questions why a request for 1000 square miles of land could not be approved for Isseneru. Well the answer is simple; Guyana has a total land mass of 83,000 square miles and there are over 125 Amerindian communities which comprise about 9.2% of the population. If 1000 square miles is granted to each community it is clear what the math will be. I therefore submit that such a question is not only irrational but shows that wisdom has eluded Mr Cheong.
Concerning the land granted to Kanashen (Gunns), this area was described in the now repealed 1951 Amerindian Act as belonging to the said named community. How the area was determined back then is not clear but the community always regarded the area as belonging to them, since in 1977 the government placed the description in law. The PPP/Civic Government, responding to the request from the community granted title to the community and for this we have no apology to make.
I will not comment on the other criticisms Mr Cheong has levelled against the Amerindian Act and the government, except to say that in August 2006 the Amerindians decided whether the Act (and the procedure to deal with land) which was passed only six months earlier was good for them. The results are known.
Yours faithfully,
Carolyn Rodrigues
Minister of Amerindian Affairs
