Dear Editor,
The Guyana Chronicle of August 24 reports that PM Nagamootoo “has promised to revise and reclaim radio and television licences that were doled out under the previous People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Government to relatives, cronies, and friends of the party.” The report went on to claim that the Guyana National Broadcasting Authority (GNBA) distributed licences before the November 2011 elections.
Before the coalition government commits any political, legal or PR missteps on this matter, I think I should, as a director of the outgoing board of the GNBA, set the record straight. In so doing, I am not attempting to defend the manner in which licences were “doled out” nor am I defending the faulty design and the unilateral imposition of the legislation that established the authority.
First, let’s get our dates correct. The Broadcasting Act 17 of 2011 was passed by the National Assembly in July 2011 and was assented to by Bharrat Jagdeo on September 27, 2011. Eleven months later, in August 2012, the Broadcasting Act (and therefore the GNBA) was activated. The first meeting of the board of the GNBA was later held on October 11, 2012. Obviously, before this date, the GNBA could not function because it simply did not exist other than on paper. It could not and did not receive or process applications, nor could it issue licences to anyone.
A year earlier, however, in November 2011, then President Jagdeo approved radio licences and frequencies for ten individuals and companies. He derived his authority not under the Broadcasting Act (still waiting to be activated) but under the Post and Telegraph Act (I am told). When the GNBA finally sat down in October 2012, it met a broadcasting system with existing operators with approved licences, including the ten. This chronology of events must now finally put to rest the unfounded charge that it was the GNBA that first issued licences to the Jadgeo “ten”. The GNBA was not around at that time.
By October 2012 (when the board of the GNBA first met), the situation with all licensees had reached a stage that few persons take note of. And that concerned the fact that by December of that same year the law required every single existing licence holder to apply for annual licences under the new Broadcasting Act. There was no automatic renewal or rollover of previous licences. All applicants had to meet several new requirements, including submission of a business plan and establishment of a corporate body. All those who met these and other requirements were granted licences by the GNBA for 2013.
The record will also show that the GNBA repeatedly asked persons and companies who had applied for licences and frequencies, in some cases, literally decades ago, to reapply under the new law. Up to the GNBA’s last board meeting in late 2014, I did not see any such applications. Amidst the many public complaints about discrimination against these old applicants, no one has explained the difficulty they face in submitting a new application to the GNBA, with a note referring to the existence of an earlier application.
From public indications, the coalition government is set to reconstitute the board of the GNBA among other changes to the media landscape. I would advise the government as follows: (i) it must urgently pass an amended broadcasting act in line with its earlier criticisms and promises. One of the foremost amendments must be the formula to compose the board; (ii) it must ensure that the understandable desire to involve persons with broadcasting expertise to manage the system does not lead to accusations of conflict of interest; and (iii) it has to accept that the 2011 issue of licences to Jagdeo’s friends has been overtaken by events and is now a dead legal (not to be confused with political) issue. All applicants for new or renewed licences must now receive fair treatment before the law.
Yours faithfully,
Sherwood Lowe