Guyana has witnessed a string of corruption scandals in recent months, each revealing troubling patterns of political favouritism, financial mismanagement, and silence from those in power. The Tepui contract scandal, where a major deal was awarded to a close associate of the government, has lingered without answers. A real estate-for-land scheme allegedly involving a former Chairman of the Central Housing and Planning Authority surfaced, raising further concerns. Now, attention has turned to the Guyana Online Academy of Learning (GOAL) programme, an initiative praised as a gateway to higher education but now shrouded in controversy.
The fallout from GOAL’s partnerships with Staffordshire University must have left students questioning the credibility of their degrees. At the heart of the issue is a mysterious intermediary organization—International Skill Development Corporation or ISDC – one that apparently managed relationships between GOAL and foreign universities. This raises urgent questions: Who sanctioned this arrangement? Why was an intermediary needed? What were the financial terms? Instead of addressing these concerns, the government has responded with silence—a silence that has become a defining feature of governance in Guyana.
There are three fundamental reasons why GOAL’s mismanagement demands public scrutiny.
1.The programme is funded by state revenues —with expenditures running into the billions of Guyanese dollars. The public has a right to know how this money was spent and whether it was used to genuinely uplift students or simply enrich select individuals. 2. Many students now hold degrees that there may be doubts over. 3. Are the GOAL propgrammes relevant to Guyana’s needs in this new economy.
For students, this should be more than just a political issue—it is a personal crisis. Some may be wondering how to salvage their academic standing, how to explain their credentials to employers, especially in a competitive labour market, or whether they have been irreparably misled. The government’s refusal to address these concerns is not only irresponsible but borderline cruel.
A central figure in this GOAL controversy is Dr. Ashni Singh, Minister within the Office of the President with responsibility for Finance and the Public Service, who oversees GOAL’s finances. Given his role, he must have known about the financial arrangements with foreign universities and the third party that facilitated them. This raises critical questions: Did Dr. Singh authorize or review these financial dealings? Were due diligence reports conducted on the universities and intermediary entity? If irregularities were flagged, what actions were taken?
Dr. Singh’s silence is troubling. If he genuinely supports transparency, why not commission an independent audit? And if he has answers, why not provide them? Public confidence in GOAL’s leadership has already been affected by contradictory statements.
While the government remains silent, students must take proactive steps to verify the credibility of their degrees. Contact accreditation councils in the countries where their institutions are registered. Compare their university rankings with institutions like the University of Guyana or University of the West Indies. It is imperative that legal advice be sought if they believe they were misled about the legitimacy of their programmes. For those who pursued doctoral degrees, they should ensure that proper academic protocols were followed. A PhD from an unaccredited institution can have severe professional consequences, especially for those seeking careers in academia or specialized fields.
Legal and financial experts, including Christopher Ram, have recommended that GOAL be halted immediately and subjected to an independent audit. This is a necessary first step. But it should go further: Students’ testimonies should be included in the audit. If evidence of misconduct is found, legal action should follow. The findings must be made public—not hidden behind bureaucratic walls.
This is about more than just GOAL. It is about ending the culture of secrecy and unaccountability that enables corruption in Guyana. Every time a scandal erupts, there is initial outrage, followed by silence, followed by inaction. It is time to break this cycle. The students affected by GOAL deserve answers. The government must choose—either break the silence or continue proving that in Guyana, corruption is met with complicity, not consequence.
Editor’s note: The earlier version of this editorial had incorrectly mentioned the University of Liverpool.
