Dear Editor,
The City Engineer (CE) has found himself embroiled in a matter between the Government and M&CC which clashes and treads on his remit and purview as City Engineer.
First, not following promptly on Council’s cease order, he offered what he believed to be clarity on the ownership of the land. This did not find favour with the Chief Citizen, and the CE was duly scolded and reprimanded.
Second, the City Engineer, having been instructed, placed the Council’s notice on the fence of the controversial premises, but subsequently removed it; for, as he put it, the notice was inadvertent, since no work on the premises had commenced or was ongoing. Now the CE is the subject of disciplinary considerations for defying the Council’s instructions regarding the notice.
This entire matter: regarding ownership and ascertaining rightful ownership of the lands and the CE’s actions, reeks of pressure being brought to the Mayor and that part of the Council which supports him.
When objections arose about the lands and ownership, the Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission issued a statement on the matter. When that did not suffice, a detailed statement was then issued with all the supporting evidence.
The M&CC has responsibility to seek and clarify its own records and those of the Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission. Instead, it is jumping on a political high horse. The due diligence undertaken by the CE cannot be faulted. It is what is expected of a professional. The discipling of the CE is perceived as face saving for the mayor and his band of councillors. The CE should not be penalised or be made a scapegoat for carrying out his functions in a clear, unbiased, and transparent manner.
It still begs the question: to be, or not to be City Engineer?
Sincerely,
Shamshun Mohamed
