Dear Editor,
Fuad Rahaman’s comment in the online edition of SN is as follows:
“Surrendering of our sovereignty has nothing to do with the PPP Gov’t. . . . Has Mr. Ram now mustered the courage to confront the PNC + AFC for selling out. That PSA is a done deal; sure as Shridath Ramphal is dead”.
I am prompted to comment as follows:
• I understand Fuad’s argument. A contract signed and sealed – sanctity – cannot ever be renegotiated. Go blame the previous govt who signed it. It is a false argument. I will tell you why.
(1) The contract provides for renegotiation, providing both parties agree. If commonsense says, one party would never agree, then for all practical purposes this clause has no meaning. So, why was it inserted in the contract in the first place? There are precedents that showed that one party or the other has used its leverages – or just made commonsense pleas to persuade the other party to do the right thing, it has worked to obtain renegotiation and a Fair Contract. Most trained lawyers would try to figure out the meaning of this clause.
(2) In Contract law, there is an element called “consideration”. Many contracts have been set aside by courts for “lack of adequate consideration”. 2% Royalty is guaranteed to fail this test, all things being equal. In fact, in this case, all things are not equal – 75% Cost Recovery (CR) (Suriname’s 60%), zero % profits’ tax for life of contract (Suriname’s provides for 36%. I am not hinting at litigation; that’s not necessary. Simply demanding renegotiation and using your leverages will suffice to get the other party to the table.
You have to suspect the motives of any Guyanese who know these facts of the egregiously lopsided contract and would rise to essentially defend Exxon, help Exxon to rip off this Guyanese nation of billions of dollars. Cheating the nation of Fair Value of its resources.
In Guyana today, GoG has all but surrendered its sovereignty to Exxon – lots of videos and articles by renowned writers have established this point.
Reading Fuad’s post – and several others, one thing is clear. He sees this struggle in Guyana as an Indian vs African struggle for power – no matter how many $billions you cede away to Exxon. His bottom line always: I don’t care about compromised sovereignty or how many $billions Guyana loses; all I care about is that I don’t want to see the Indian party renegotiate this contract and put its hold on power at risk.
Yours faithfully,
Mike Persaud
