Dear Editor,
In the letter column of the Sunday Stabroek of 10th March, 2013, Ms. Melinda Janki wrote “There is not, and never has been, any such thing as ancestral or traditional lands in Guyana.”
This opinion is legally correct, since the Constitution of Guyana does not mention ancestral or traditional lands.
However, this opinion should be viewed against the backdrop of the origin of the present Constitution, which is tied to our colonial past. The colonial masters, in their quest for total control, could not tolerate the idea, of Amerindian traditional lands. All lands became Crown Lands. After Independence these lands became State Lands and State Forests etc. controlled by the Government passed on from the Crown. Today that control manifests itself in the awarding and demarcation of Reservations and the withholding of Mineral Rights.
The original occupiers of these lands were insignificant and of no value to the colonists. Perhaps because they were made up of scattered and disorganised groups.
Ms. Janki’s opinion therefore, although constitutionally correct, is morally incorrect, since it ignores the fact that there were people living in these parts of the world long before the arrival of colonists, slaves and indentured labourers. And the descendants of these people are the rightful heirs of these lands. Her skilful use of this statement to lend support to the awarding of mining rights to a company rather than to an Amerindian community is not commendable.
Ms. Janki would withdraw this statement if she has regard for the Amerindians of Guyana whose ancestors were the people found on these lands by the colonists.
Well, the trend these days is just to be legally correct. Who cares about morality and Amerindians when there is a tailored Constitution to enforce your actions?
Yours faithfully,
Glen King
