Dear Editor,
Reports of a current event affecting Trinidad and Tobago have reached our shores. The event is the stain of an oil spill traced to the wreckage of a vessel.
At the time of writing the Trinidad authorities have identified the name of the vessel and the direction of travel but little else. It appears the owners of the vessel did their best to avoid the responsibilities attendant upon the very event that transpired – an oil spill. The vessel was registered in a country that did not demand strict observance of the rules of behaviour. No one even reported the disaster when it happened so that the authorities could prepare.
What we do know is that the oil leakage has not been stanched and that it is traveling in the direction of other Caribbean territories – in the same way that it has been projected that an oil spill would, if its source is the petroleum operations in our waters. We also know that it is threatening to affect the livelihood of citizens of those territories and has already put a trace of oil sludge along the affected coastline.
What those of us who have a memory of the Piper Alpha disaster in the UK in the 1980’s, the Exxon Valdez in 1989, and the Deepwater Horizon in 2010 may not have realized is what we are learning now: that there is a smell that is so strong that it is advisable for the residents to temporarily relocate.
We have been called busybodies by the politicians of this country for taking action against the EPA for dereliction of its duties. The lower court has agreed with our position. But, apparently under the influence of our wise politicians, the matter is under appeal. Let us put it in stark terms: The EPA is appealing a ruling that says that it is to enforce its own laws. If that appears to be a misprint please understand that it is not. The case is simply that. The EPA has refused to enforce its own rules and we are asking the court to compel it to do so.
But there is more. No politician has the right to redefine persons in whom the constitution of this country has imposed a duty to protect its property as busybodies. That is what the Constitution of Guyana does. Article 32 of the Constitution of Guyana provides that: “It is the joint duty of the state, the society, and every citizen … to take care of and protect public property.”
We suspect that it is the first time that many citizens would learn that the Constitution almost instructs them to protect public property. Our politicians have not seen it fit to educate us on the provisions of the constitution. In fact, they have studiously ignored Article 32 even though they are supposed to be guided by it. They have not only failed to enact legislation to give it the force of law that people can enforce ; they actually treat it as though it is a nuisance – except when its clauses need to be trawled to settle electoral impasses.
The environment is public property. We are not surprised that there are politicians who do not know about this provision. After all, in the most recent elections fiasco, one politician declared that he had never read the constitution.
Perhaps now that an incident has occurred which we hope does not foreshadow a greater disaster on our shores, citizens would have a better understanding of our fight. The latest report is that the vessel had been heading for Guyana at the time of the disaster. Hopefully, that is the only thing about that disaster that is headed for Guyana.
Yours faithfully,
Frederick W. A. Collins
Godfrey Whyte
