By
Anna Correia
The amendment of the Amerindian Act 6–2006 has been on the agenda of the Amerindian Peoples Association (APA) for years, initially supported by Minister Allicock and acolytes in their former positions. And it is a worthy cause insofar as the Act does reveal itself to be incomplete in some aspects, (for instance where mining encumbrances on Amerindian lands are concerned) and that legislation in general, must always be subject to adaptations synchronised to the rhythm of progress in a society.
However, the true motive behind the urge to reform the Act can be object to scepticism, as it stems principally from the notion of ancestral lands. In a recent Guyana Times article, the Minister avoided discussing the titling of ancestral lands, perhaps because he already knows that his Government will not make such commitments. Instead, he emphasised the importance of having the Act reinforce Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), a concept which he stated to be “enshrined in the Act” but “ignored over the years”. Interestingly, the Minister seemed unaware that the term FPIC does not figure at all in the Act, and is therefore not an “enshrined” principle. Instead, one may deduce that processes set out by the Act are responsive to the concept of FPIC, such as the land titling process directed by Part VI of the document. While reinforcing FPIC makes for valid revision, it is just a mask for other motives.
Incidentally, the Minister in his deliverance, spoke of the necessity to include stakeholders in the process of amendment of the Act, and highlighted the importance of the “South Indigenous Group”, presumably the South Central Peoples Development Association (SCEPDA). If it is that he is indeed referring to SCEPDA, then it comes as a surprise to those who are informed of the group’s agenda, as well as of the fact that is an extension of the APA.
The group is headed by Nicholas Fredericks, son-in-law of the APA’s very own Tony James. It purports to defend the land rights of the Amerindians of South Central Rupununi. Yet, the majority of villages in the Rupununi are titled and many have already applied for extension under the Amerindian Land Titling Project. So the question is, what land rights exactly is this group fighting for, so that it should suddenly be considered such an important element to the revision of the Act?
Evidently, Minister Allicock for the sake of tempering public reaction, omitted that the group is actually fighting for some 17 villages in the Rupununi to merge their lands, so that the Wapishana people (mainly) would become owners of the entire portion of Guyana extending from Central Rupununi downwards. In order to achieve this, the group relies directly on the support of the APA which through its lawyer – a non-Guyanese who has had a hand in most of the land cases supported by the organisation – is lobbying Toshaos. Toshaos are reportedly being bought without the Free, Prior and Informed Consent of their people, in violation of the UNDRIP. This by itself should warrant an investigation from Minister Allicock who is so dearly concerned about FPIC.
Reports also indicate that the group so far, is unable to obtain the consent of all the Toshaos required to support this malign initiative, for different reasons which range from their objection to the idea, to the fact that they do not wish to be part of SCEPDA. Such is the case of Toshaos in the Deep South, who have already indicated that their lands are not geographically located in South Central Rupununi, and therefore cannot be represented by SCEPDA. Some of these Toshaos have reported the immense pressure to which they are being subjected by the said group and the supporting APA.
There have been documented instances in the recent past where Toshaos of South Central made decisions in support of SCEPDA’s agenda, without the knowledge of their Village Councillors. If SCEPDA and the APA are encouraging this, then clearly, they are more prone to disregarding the Amerindian Act than reforming it in the best interest of all Guyanese. Article 25 of the Act speaks against decision-making of Village Councillors without the informed consent of the entirety of the Council.
It is dangerous for the Ministry to engage stakeholders who do not represent the interests of all Amerindians combined, more so if these stakeholders disregard the fact that the Act is not just a matter of indigenous rights, but of national interest to which all Guyanese are stakeholders.
