Set up an International Commission of Inquiry into the missing weapons
Peeping Tom
Kaieteur News
January 27, 2007
A bombshell has been dropped on the nation. The President has told us that there was a Board of Inquiry into the disappearance into the missing army weapons and that the report is now being studied by the Defence Board.
Firstly, it needs to be asked how long did it take for this Board of Inquiry to complete its work and secondly just how long did it take to complete its report. Thirdly, we should ask how long the report was in the hands of the Defence Board. To say I am disappointed that the journalists at the President's press conference did not ask these questions is to put it mildly
It has been close to one year now since the army weapons went missing, and only now we are told the report of the Board of Inquiry is being studied. I do not know just how much confidence the public will have in the outcome of this review by the Defence Board but as far as the Peeper is concerned, I believe that what is needed is a commission of inquiry comprised of experts from overseas, including persons who have an appreciation of the British system of accountability.
Under that system, heads of agencies would normally not have to be asked to step aside when things such as the loss of the missing weapons take place. Under the British tradition, even if a public officer is not personally responsible for something that went wrong, by virtue of his or her role as the head of an agency, that person would feel a moral obligation to step aside. The examples of this are too numerous to mention.
I cannot understand why the Defence Board and the President of Guyana as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces has not asked the head of the military in Guyana to tender his resignation over this loss. Even though that person may have had absolutely nothing to do with the loss, and would have been in no way personally culpable for the loss, it is in keeping with the tradition of being held accountable that one would expect that that person should have done the right thing and voluntarily offered his resignation.
Only this week the US State Department's senior arms control and security official resigned. It is believed that his resignation was triggered by the failure to stop Iran and North Korea from developing their nuclear programs, even though this official was never directly involved in negotiation with the two countries.
And just over a week ago, the head of Israel 's army resigned over his country's failure to crush Hezbollah during last summer's invasion of Lebanon . He took responsibility for mishandling the invasion despite the fact that the international community would never have allowed Israel to undertake the full-scale occupation necessary to fully crush Hezbollah.
The loss of the missing weapons has exposed the nation to its greatest ever security threat. And to date no one has been charged or no one has been held accountable for the missing weapons.
Though some of the weapons have been retrieved, there has been dissatisfaction over the recovery efforts with the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forced being forced to publicly call on the Chief-of-Staff to recover the missing weapons.
It is now clear that despite what the public was initially led to believe, the weapons or at least some of them are in the hands of criminal gangs and some of them were used in the committing of spectacular heists such as the daylight robbery of two banks in Berbice. Seven of the missing weapons were recovered after the joint services pursued some of the robbers and cornered them in swamplands. Then later a man with a long association with criminals was shot dead after he reportedly jumped into a pit latrine and fired upon a police search team.
But the most disturbing feature of all, has ironically been the mysterious recovery of three of the weapons. One was found under some shrubbery and two other were found following hidden in some sand. I have always wondered about how easy it was that three weapons were found. Why would those who obviously had to go to a great deal of trouble to steal the weapons be so careless as to leave one in some bush and two under a sand heap?
Reports in this newspaper have now indicated that it was based on information supplied that the three missing weapons were found. But what is more disturbing was the report that the information was received through telephone calls which originated from the telephone of a senior person within the military.
Another report in this week's Kaieteur News indicated that the polygraph results have disappeared from the file. I normally do not place too much confidence in polygraph tests. However, I am disturbed that any record could disappear from any file.
A matter such as this should have seen the opposition rushing to parliament to call for the suspension of the Standing Orders in order to have an emergency debate. However, as we now know, since the report of the missing polygraph results originated from a press report and since press reports cannot be the basis of asking for a suspension of parliament's Standing Orders, then there can be no emergency debate unless the government confirms that the documents are indeed missing.
Since the main opposition is wont to playing constituency politics when it comes to the army, I therefore believe that it is for the government to publicly confirm the missing records and then move for a full debate into the missing army weapons.
I hope that this can be done and that arising out of this debate will be a decision to establish a commission of inquiry comprised of experts from overseas who will examine the entire affair of the missing weapons, inclusive of the recovery efforts, the origins of the phone calls that allegedly provided the tips for the recovery of three of the weapons, the alleged disappearance of polygraph results and who or whom should be held accountable for this fiasco.