Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698076459321.pdf (Guyana)
8th July, 2008 In the ERC Boardroom At Lot 66, Peter Rose & Anira Streets Queenstown, Georgetown CONSULTATION WITH AMERINDIAN RESIDENTS The Ethnic Relations Commission held a Public Consultation in respect to the Perceived Needs of the Amerindian Community in Guyana on Tuesday 8th July, 2008 at 10:45 hours.
ATTENDEES - ERC Bishop Juan Edghill Mr. Carvil Duncan Ms. Cheryl Sampson Ms. Christine King Ms. Cameal Mentore PRESENTERS David James Colin Klautky Peter Persaud Debroy Thomas Majuna Edwards Victor Lawlist Alphonso Crème Pamela Mendonca Phyllis Ossorio Medlina Roberts Ashton Simon - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Chairman Commissioner Commissioner CEO/Secretary Senior Investigative Officer/Scribe Amerindian People’s Association Guyanese Organisation of Indigenous Peoples The Amerindian Action Movement of Guyana Toshau, Arau Village Toshau, Micobie Village Batavia, Cuyuni River, Region 7 Village Councillor, Micobie Village, Region 8 The Amerindian Action Movement of Guyana The Amerindian Action Movement of Guyana Village Councillor, Micobie Village, Region 8 National Amerindian Environmental Educational Development Foundation Page 1 ERC The Chairman, ERC welcomed Representatives of the Amerindian Community to the Ethnic Relations Commission and in his remarks, he spoke about ERC’s mandate to enquire into the perceived needs of various ethnic groups in Guyana as regards to barriers they experience politically, culturally and socially.
He advised that a report of the consultation will be forwarded to the National Assembly after it is examined and consented to by all presenters.

The Chairman further mentioned that since the ERC had already received some of their written presentations the process would be simple; he said that it is expected that there would be frank and open discussions on the perceived needs of the Amerindian Community.
The panel was introduced and the Chairman informed the gathering that protocol would be observed by the Commissioners.

Six persons indicated that they were making presentations:- Majuni Edwards, Debroy Thomas, Peter Persaud, Colin Klautky, Asthon Simon and David James.

MAJUNA EDWARDS - Toshau of Micobie Toshau Edwards said that she was happy to attend the meeting and spoke of the problems affecting her village.
She said that her community was concerned about a land problem in Micobie with Mr. Winston Rambarran, a miner who has a claim and is conducting gold mining activities in their village.

Toshau Edwards mentioned that it was being done in full view of the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC).

She advised that her community had received Land Titles in March, 2006 and that it is important that miners seek the consent of the village before commencing mining.
According to her the GGMC issues a mining permit for small and medium scale mining and that all other miners have complied except Mr. Rambarran.

She added that the (GGMC) was accepting payment from miners for permits despite her intervention.

She pointed out that this practice of Mr. Rambarran was illegal, that she would like him off their land and the GGMC must cancel all claims for mining.

Chairman ERC enquired if any meetings were held with Mr. Rambarran and she replied in the negative.
He further asked her if she would be inclined to have a round table meeting to discuss the matter with Mr. Rambarran and to this she declined.

Mr. Peter Persaud intervened and said that Mr. Rambarran and Mr. Lalta Narine are miners who have no respect for the village, where they have mining properties.

He stated that they should obtain consent from the village before commencing their work there.
Page 2 ERC Mr. David James added that the GGMC was written, and the matter is being addressed by Mr. Whittaker.

It was noted that the other miners do acknowledge the village council but not Mr. Rambarran.

It was also mentioned that the GGMC wrote him a letter to cease work, this was done but he is still in the area with his equipment.

The matter was to be further pursued.


DEBROY THOMAS - Toshau of Arau, Region # 7 Mr. Thomas said that the main problems in his Community were illegal mining, robbery, prostitution, selling of alcohol in mining camps, drugs and danger to aquatic life.
He reported that the GGMC was issuing licences/permits to miners without the consent of the Toshau; that Miners from Brazil, Venezuela were entering his village and despite his complaints to the GGMC, the Prime Minister and the Amerindian People’s Association, the situation remains the same.

He requested the intervention of ERC.

Mr. David James, advised that he is the lawyer representing Micobie and Arau and that Amerindians are known to do farming and fishing in a certain area.
He said that there was a meeting with the Chief of Staff, Commander Gary Best and Colonel Bruce Lovell.

Colonel Lovell had promised to check out the area but did not do so.

Mr. James also mentioned that there was a meeting which he had attended with Mr. Stephen Fraser, the Prime Minister and the Toshau of Arau along with GGMC on the matter.
He disclosed that the GGMC has no legal requirement but concessions were granted by them, and only when the miners are going into the villages to do Mining then the villagers would know that they have claims.

At this point, Commissioner Cheryl Sampson enquired if anyone had checked before the Land Titles were issued.

Mr. James responded that he was not sure and promised to do so.

Commissioner Carvil Duncan said that his concern was that action should be taken with regard to prostitution in the village.
The Chairman ERC stated that Mining Officers had the power to ensure that discipline was carried out in the Camps, and systems enforced.

He asked if there was any option of mediation.

Mr. James responded in the affirmative and promised to send documents on concessions and titles to ERC.

Page 3 ERC PETER PERSAUD - TAAMOG He presented his report which was already circulated.

thanked him issues raised and accompanying The ERC Chairman recommendations.
Commissioner Sampson sought clarification on Page 6 Sub paragraph (d) of his report which seemed to indicate that the “ERC was not fully Constituted”.

the for COLIN KLAUTKY - GOIP Mr. Colin Klautky read his report which was also circulated and emphasized on village names that were changed.

The Chairman ERC on enquiring who had changed the names of the village, was told that it was done by the early Christian (Catholics and Anglicans) Missionary starting from the 1500’s and onward.
In keeping with global Indigenous trends, the GOIP wants the process reversed.

The trend of returning to their original names has already started since 1989.

That year, St. Francis in Region 5 became Moraikobai its present official name.

This advocacy came from within Moraikobai itself due partly to the efforts of former headteacher and GOIP Committee Member, Mr. Leit Scamair.

The GOIP intends to continue advocating for other villages such as St. Ignatius in Region 9 to Zariwa, its original name.
Commissioner Sampson then spoke of her visit to Region 1 where it was made clear who the people wanted to serve in their community.

MR. DAVID JAMES - AMERINDIAN PEOPLE’S ASSOCIATION.

Mr. James said that he welcomed the opportunity to make a presentation to the ERC.

He spoke on the following issues relative to the Amerindian Act: RIGHT TO LAND TITLES 1.

Generally arbitrary and unfair 2.

The Act specified the right to land territories and resources.

3.
3.

The Act enables the Minister alone to determine what are these lands.

Page 4 ERC 4.

The Minister makes or determines what are the lands for Indigenous people and these results are unfair.

5.

Protection of land rights, the future and everything in respect of the lives of the people.

OWNERS OF LAND RIGHTS 1.

The Presenter highlighted Section 85 of the Amerindian Act.

2.

The state holds the rights of the indigenous people.

3.

Owners should be recognized and protected by law.

4.
4.

GGMC granting permits to miners thus denying the Amerindian people from the large portion of land that belongs to them.

Section 6 of 1991 1.

This Section spoke to discrimination of the People.

2.

Violation of the rights of the people to their village 3.

At present only one village can apply for a title.

All satellite villages have their own title.

4.

In 1999 there was one matter before the Court, the trial lasted a year.

5.

There should be improvement in the laws governing Indigenous people.
6.

State should give legal recognition to the Amerindian Act which is urgently needed to be amended.

HEALTH 1.

Mercury pollution affecting human beings.

2.

In areas like Micobie and Mazaruni there is a high level of mercury pollution.

3.

Gencab – Canadian personnel had addressed pollution in Micobie and authorities were to follow up.

4.

Guns in the Wai Wai area – nothing is being done to address that problem.

EDUCATION 1.
EDUCATION 1.

The education offered in Amerindian Communities was lower than those offered to coastlanders.

2.

No Amerindian student was successful in the top level of the last Grade 6 examination.

Page 5 ERC 3.

Commissioner Sampson noted that a number of Amerindians graduated from CPCE recently.

It was her hope that they would return to serve their communities.
The ERC Chairman asked about equal access and opportunity; He queried about the inadequacies in the Act if they were raised before or if they were ignored or if there were genuine concerns that were not attended to.

Mr. James in his response said, that equal access was given but quality education was not being delivered.

With respect to the Act, he said that the consultative process lasted 2 years, the report was extremely good but the fundamental Rights that were proposed, were excluded.
The Act went to a select committee but it remained the same.

Mr. Colin Klautky intervened and informed the meeting that teachers do not have resources.

He said that Mr.

Basil Rodriques tried to keep the Amerindian culture alive in Moruca and he had to do it alone.

He suggested that the Education Ministry should change its programme.

It was pointed out also that Amerindian ideas are dismissed by the Ministry of Education.
Mr. Peter Persaud in his contribution said that while there are skilled teachers, there are no resources and accommodation for them.

Commissioner Sampson agreed that there is no accommodation provided for teachers to teach in the Interior.

She felt that the Ministry of Education has to look into this aspect.

MR. ASHTHON SIMON made the following points:- 1.

He was concerned with the quality of Education in general 2.

Summer programmes for Amerindians 3.

Amerindians are isolated 4.


Spoke of the Scouting Association – youths need to be motivated to join.

5.

Unfair treatment to women – authorities are slow to take action.

6.

Rape committed on Amerindian girls and women goes unnoticed.

7.

A system to be put in place for Police to serve communities speedily.

8.

Potable water for Amerindian communities.

9.

Preservation of foods that are available.

Page 6 ERC 10.

Legal Services must be available to hinterland People.

11.
11.

The length of time people have to wait at hospitals before they can get attention.

12.

Chinese exploiting Amerindian women and young girls by paying them low wages and using them as sex workers.

13.

Exploitation in the mining and timber sectors in the form of low wages.

14.

The Geology and Mines Commission also discriminated against Amerindians.

The Chairman asked if the “Buckman/woman stigma” still exists and he was told that it occurred on a daily basis.
The Chairman again asked about services of Health Workers and if the preference was for Coastlanders.

Mr. Simon replied that Health Workers were accepted to a point.

He added that Amerindians accept their own in their community.

There was the call for a Policing Group in Batavia.

The ERC Chairman thanked the group for their meaningful presentations and promised to examine the reports submitted.
The Public Consultation concluded at 13:50 hrs with the submission of written presentations which are appendices to this report.

Page 7 ERC APPENDICES 1.

Submission by APA and GOIP 2.

Submission by GOIP 3.

Submission 4.

Submission by NADF (with attachment) by TAAMOG pages 1 – 15 1 – 3 1 – 9 1 - 9 Page 8 ERC APPENDIX 1 Fresented to the Ethnic $elations Comrnission (SRC) Re.
ERC's Consultation with Amerindian Organisations Submission dn the Situation af Hurnun Rights of the Indigenous Peoples af GuY&n& Submitted By Amerindian F..lopes Association of Guyana (APA) .

and Guyanese Organisation for Indigenous Peoples (GOIP) 2od July 2oo8 thd*tdig";;; Executive SummarY ' This report is submitted by the Amerindian Peoples Association of Guyana and the indigenous Guyanese ,Organisation of lndig"nous Peoples, UotU of which are- rytt:Tt p*pl**' otsi*i"rtions.
The repia highlighisJhe discrimination and violation of Human puopfiu in dryana face which is rnost particularly evident in iishir protect connestion with Guyana's failure to adequately rycogy?., Ft|*Ttee indigenotrs,peoples' rights to own and cgntrg_l itteir ttiditional lands and territorie$' R*rirr.ogieXptoitdion Seratiorrs pose a major threat to^many indigenous peoples and a1e trnder.taken without little regard for their tights and well being.
In .r{"" some cases, indige;ous peoptes and their traditionfu lands have.suffered irreparable harm' rains firmlY Discrirnination against indigenous peoples is not a. relic of the past' It.ren entrenched in current polici and piaetice and remains a feAture of the Amerindian Act replaced 2006, which *ut lrct; wtrittr was overtly discriminatory and w-hiclr had been the the fgsl *uin l*rn regulating indigenous peoples and their affairs until 2006.
The Amerindian Act 2006 does,iot coniain rJ*" of itre *ort qregious examples of discrimination found in the Amerindian Act 1951, but it is nonetheless discriminatory on multiple grounds.
bi Cuya;a's National *ssernbfl in that year' f$s-law "**id -dmerindian ,rnles is not a relic ""ruJtf;;J;d .and The Arnerindian Act 2006 was the nrbject of grave concern expressed by the uN Committee for the Elimination of Racial Discriminatioo (CERD) in its Concluding Observations when the state-party Guyana feported to this body in 20A6.
CERD in this regard observed among others, thc following: The Comninee notes with deep concern that, under the Amerindian Act (2006)' 15. decisions taken by the Vflla,ge Councili of indigenous communities concerning, inter alia, scientific reseaf,ch asd hrde i*te *iniog on tbeir lands,-as well as taxation, are subject to approval and/or gazattlrg 6y Uu comp*e,it nAinister, and tlat indigenous communities without uirv f*e titte ('trititted c-omrnunities'fare also not entitled to a Village Council.
(Aa' 5 (c)) The Committcc urgcs the Stste party to remove the discriminatory distinctisn between- titted and untitled communities from the 2{106 Amerindian Act and from any other legislrtion- In pcrticularn it urges the Statc party to recognizc rnd iupporttle cstannshment of Vitlage Councils or otber appropriate institutioni in dl indigenous eommunitieer_vestcd with the poweri oecessary for the self-administration and the control of the usen mfinagement and conservrtion of traditional lnnds Ond resources.l t Guyana - Concluding Obrer:vations of the Comrnittec on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination - Comirittee on the Elimination of Racial Disorimination, Sixty-eight Session 2OeFebruary- tOn March 2006.
CERD also expressed its deep concem regarding Gu;raRa's fiailure to adequately recognize, guarintee and protect indigenor.rs peoples' rig'hts to own and control their traditional lands, territories and resources.
In this regard it sbserved: The Commitee is deeply concemed about the lack of lesal rycogp4ion of the rights of 16. own*ship and possession of indigenous connmunities over &e lands which they traditionally occupy anC aU"ut the State p,arty's practice of granting land titles exeluding bodie,s of waters and subsoii resources to indigenous communities on tle basis sf numerical and other criteria not necessarily in acoordancE with tlre traditions of indigenous communities concerned, thoreby depriving untitled and ineligible cornmrurities of rights to lands they traditionalty occupy' (fut' 5 (d) (v)) The Committee urges the Statc pcfty to rccognize and protect the riglts of all indigenous communities to ownr develop and eontrolrthe lands which they traditionally occupy, including water and subsoil r€sourees' and to safeguard thcir right to use lrnds not exclusively occupied by themr to which they have treditionally had rccess for thcir subsistenee, in accardanee with the'Committoete Genirat Recoqmendation No.
232 end taking into account ILO Convention No, 169 on fndigenous cnd Tribal Feoples.

It also urges the State party, in consultation with the indigenous communities concerned, (a) to dernarcate or otherwise identiS the lands which they traditionally occupy or use, (b) to establish adequate procedures, and to define clear and iust criteria to resolve land clains by indigenous comrnunities within the domestic judicial system while taking due account of relevant indigenous customa,ry laws."
CERD also noted the health and environmental problems caused by mining operation$ which mainly affects iqdigenous peoples and their communities and stated it deep concern as follows: The Committee is deeply concerned tbat, despite the State party's efforfs mentioned in 19. paragraph 6 above, thc average life e;pectancy arnong indigeaous peoples is low, and that they are reportedly disproportionately affected by nnalaria and euvironmenJal pollution, in pa*icular mercury and bacterial contamination of rivers caused by mining ac*ivities in areas inhabited by indigenous peoples.
(Art.

5 (e) (ivD ' The Committee urges the State perty to ensure the availability of adequate medical treatment in hinterhnd arer$, in particulsr those inhabited by indigenous peoples, by increasing the number of skilled doctors and of adequatc health facilities in thcse nreas, by intensifring thc trtining of health personnel from indigenous communities, and by allocating sufficient funds ' CERD, General Recommendation Ns.

23: Indigenous peoples, at para.

5.


3 Guyana - Concluding Obsewations of the Committae on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination - Committee on the Elimination of Racial Dissrimination, Sixty-eight Session 20e Febnrary - 10tr March 20A6.

to that effect.

Furthermore, it recommends that the State party.undertake infur*red eonsent of environmentat irnpact sssessments and sg€k the concerned indigenbUs sommunities prior to authorizirtg any mining.
or similar operatiohs which may threaten the environrnent in areas inbabited by these' communities"a L Introduction trndigenous peoples in Cruyana are subject to multiple forms of discriminatiorq l. bath de jure and de facto.
This is evident in current legislation in particular the Amerindian Act 2006 atrd in state policy and practice r€garding, inter slia, rights to lands, territories and resources; re$ource exploitation; and in the provision of health and education serviees that are quantitatively and qualitatively inferior to those provided to othe,r sthnis groups in Stryana.
The impac* of this discriminatory treatment is exacerbated and compouaded by Z, Guyana's asts-and omissions that result in persistent threats to health and well-being caused by lalgely uncontrolled logging and mining operations on indigenorrs peoples' traditional lands and territories.

These operations also cause substantial social problems and disproportionately affeet indigenous women."
Gtryana's 2000 report on the Convention to Combat Desertification confirms that mining operation$ are largely uncontrolled: The srnall-scale gold and diarnond mining activities are also not subject to environmental c,ontrols.

These goid and diamond mining operations conaentmt€ on maximizing profits, without any concern fOr the amount of natural resources utilized in the process or the environmental effects caused by the activrty.
Data to quantift environmental impacts are tacking sincc thse bas been little or no monitoring.6 These operatisn$, ofred authorized and conducted without any or only minimal consultatiorq have caused widespread pollution of water $ources, including mercury contamination that has bio-accumulatcd in fish and humans, and greatly increased n Guyana - eoncluding Observations of the Committee on thc Elimination of Raeial Discrimination - Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Sixty-eight Session 20e Febnrary - 106 March 2AA6.
s See, inter alia, annex A(l), A(3) and A(a), 6 Gtyana's Nationsl Report on the Implementation of the United Nations Corwention to Combat of Guyana: Goorgetowt, Aprit 2000, at 19.

Available at: Des*tificatton http:/lwriw.

Ugccd.it&bpg1r€portdlac/.naliggall20!9/gqvAneens' ndf frvefuent 4 malaria infection rate$, a leading eause of infant mortality in indigemrs areas.
In some areas, mining has denied indigenous peoples access to and use of their traditional means lands and waters have suffered of subsistence and large arias of their traditional irreparable harm.

The International Human Rights Clinic of the Human Rights Prograrnme of 3. in Guyana reported on the Harvard Law School in a 200?
Study on Gold Mining extr€mely u/eak mining regulation and enforcement mechanisms which give rise to serious human rights abuse: This report documents the failure of Guyanese mining regulations to prevent severe human rights abuses and the deva5fating darnage to the nabral environment and tl}e communities in which Amerindians live.
Analysis of r4ining laws and regulations, administrative structures 9 .stablished to oversee mining activitics and the way small and medium nriaing operations are conduEted in Guyana's interior demonstrate that the laws leavs large gpps in regulatio4 deprive people of critical rights overthe lands they occupy and misallocate r€$ources and rosponsibilities.
Weaknesses in Guyana political and judicial systems as well as resource constraints and geographical difficulties fiuther the tilt the playrng field against e,ffective regulation of mining.
Guyana's continued neglect of issues surroirnding 6ining activitie$ gives rise to violations of, the serious liuman *ght internationat law, including the special hrrman rigbts protections owed to Amerindian communities as indigenous peoples' Discrimination against indigenous peoples also contributes to and is exacerbated 3. by widespread poverty.at rates far above those for other sectors of society.
A 2004 World Bank report states unequivocally that indigenous peoples are "disproportionately disadvantaged socially and economically."'

Moreover, the available socio-economic data illustrates that the actual situation and well being of indigenous peoples is deteriorating rather than improving and that poverly among indigenous peoples has substantially increased in past 10 years (iee, infra, para.

l8-9).
l8-9).

While certain improvements in lew have been realized in recent yffrs, particularly 4. revisions to the Conslitution in 2001 and 2003, discrimination against indigenous peoples remains entrenched ahd continues to hinder and impair the full and free exercise of their rights.

The Amerindiim Act 2006 further perpetuates discrimination against indigenous peoples and fails to adequately guarantee and protect their rights.
7 AIt tltat Glitters: Gald mining in Guyana, The Failare of Government Oversight and the HumanRrg&rs of,4merindian Communities; International Human Rights Clinic, Human Rigttts Progranr" Ifanrard I-aw School, Caurbridge, Massachusetts, 2807.

E Gayarn: Mucation for Att, Fast Track fnifiative Program.
Amerindian Peaples' Sffategt, http://ww*'- World Bank: Washfurgton DC, 17 September 2004, at 9, Available at wds.worldbank.or#servlef/UilpS-IBank-gefflct?pcpnt{A.tails&e-id:000012009-20041006102 054 IL General Background There are nine indigenous peoples in Guyana (referred to as Amerindians in 5. legislation since the 1950s),t A""ording to the 2002 census, there ale 68,819 indigenous p"lrnn, amorrnting ta 9.Z.psfcett of &ryana's population of approximately 750,000. thry o""upy.the iurt *u.lority of the forests and sivannahs o,f the interior - 90 percent of the co,rntry - while tfti"*ajottty of the rest of the population (Afro-Guyanese, Indo- Guyanese,lchinur", Europeans and others) live along the narrow coastal strip There are 13g'indigenous communities in Guyana, 90 percent of which are located "#ro.#ely in administretive regions 1,2,7,8 and 9.
Eigtrty-four of the 130 indigenous villages have a land title that covers a (often 6. ,rrry ,*"Il) portion of their traditional lands.

More than one-third of communities therefore laci legal title.

Collective title is vested in an elilcted Village Council, which has limited agthority ts administer village aff*irs.

Within the central government, the *u:"uitv of indigenou, i*suss.fall within ihe remit of the Miuisry of Amerindian Affairs.
Created in 1g92, the Ministry has a small staff and budget which are insuffrcient to and implement adequate programmes and policies for indigenous peoples' d;;irt Inadequate resources are stretched loen further because the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs has "adopted the approach of dealing with .. .

hinterland communities as opposed to Amerindians per se.

"lo Guyana has previously conceded that indigenous peoples suffer fuomde facto and 7. de jare discrimin*ion.
nefore the Human Righis Committee in 2001, for instance, it stated that *The question of the rights of the indigenous peoples w&s a complicated issue' ... With regard to their enjoyment of equal protectisn under the law, more government intervention *as needed.nl{ Nonetheless, at the same time, the State "said that discrimination aguinriAmerindians was a poiitical, rather than a legal problem'.. '"12 UN human rights bodies have all found that indigenous peoples in Guyana suffer 8. from discrimination *d ar" unableto effectively exercise their rights.
The Human Rights Committee in 2000, for instancg expressed its conoern "that members of theindigenous Amerindian minority do npt enjoy fully the right to equality before the 14w.

"13 It added that It is particularly concer$sd tbat the right of Amerindians to eqioy their ovrn culture is tbreafuned by llgging, mining and delays in the demarcation of their traditional lands, ' The nine peoples axe: Arecuna, Arawak" Akawaio, Carib, Macushi, Patamona, Warrau, Wapisiana and Wai Wai.
ro Initial Reports af State Parties due in 1993: Guyaw.

CRC/C/8/Ad*.47,29 July 2003, at pan.

424. rr Summary rccord of the 1830th meeting: Gayana.

AI/05/2AAL CCPR/C1SR 1830, at para.

36. o Summsry record of the t\jhth meeting : Guyana A1/05/2ffi1.

CCPR/C}SR183O, at para.

80' '1 Concluding obsewations afthe Humon Rights Cammittee: Guyana 25/04/2000.

CCPWCIT9/Add.l2l' at para.
21. in some cases insufficieat land is demarcated to elable them to pursue their tlnt traditional econornic aotivities and.that there appears to be ao offective mea5.s to enable members of Amerindian communities to enforce ttreir riglrts under articl e 27 .ra g. In 2004, the Committee on the Rights of the Child observed that discrimination against indigenous children was persi$tent and expressed its concern at "the living oonditions of Amerindian children with regard to the 'full enjoyment of all rights enshrined in the Convention, espeeially the degpadation of their natural environment and the fact that they are not taught in their own languages.
"tt It recommende4 among others, that Guyana "protect Amerindian children against discrimination" and that the current rwision of the Amerindian Act reflect the provisions and principles of the Convention on the R.ights of the Child.

"l6 In 2005, the Committee on the Elimination of Disuimination Against Women sirnilarly found that indigenCIus women in Guyana are discriminated against sn the basis of bot!_o* and gender and that inadequate attention is paid to their particular and special needs."
The Commiuee has also observed that indigonous peoples in Guyana suffer from 10. discrimination in law and practice.

In1997, it noted that The Amerindians lived in the vast undeveloped topical forest regions of the country.

Their stasdard of living was much lower than that of othor citizens and they could not readily participate in taking decisions atrecdng their lands, culture and traditions and the allocation of natural resources.
Amerindian life was regulated by the Amerindian Act, legislation dating &om colonial times and designed to prottrt the indigenous peoples from exploitation.

The Ast gave the Government the power to determine who was an Amerindian and what was an Amerindian commlnity, to appoint Amerindian leaders and, where nec€ssary, to armul desisions made by Amerindian councils.
That legislation was too restrictive and neededto be rsvised.lt In 2005, in its ConciuA;ng Observations, the UN Committee on the Elimination of I l. Racial Discrimination observed, inter alia, the following: The Committee is deeply concerned about the lack of legal recognition of the rigbts of ownership and possessiou of hdigenous communities cver fhe lands which they traditionally occupy and about the Stnte parfy's practice of granting land titles excludi4g bodies of waters and subsoil resourccs to indigenous communities on the basis of numerical and other criteria not necessarily tn Id, rs Concluding obsmation of the Committee on the Nghts of the Child: Guyana.
3AA|/2A04.

t" CRC/C/I5/Add .224, *,pans 22 ard 57.

Id.at para.

58. r7 Coneluding observations of the Comnlttee on the Eliminatton af Discrimirntion Against Women: Gayana.

22/07/2005.

CEDAW/C/Guy/CA|34, paras.36 and 39.

It Sumnwry Recard of the l242th Meeting af CERD, 2l Augutt 1997.

UN Doc.

CERD/C/SW..\242.

in accordance with the traditions of indigenous eoinmunities concemed, thereby depriving untitled and ineligibte comrnunities of rigbts to lands they traditionally occupy.

(Art.
(Art.

5 (d) (v)) The Committee urgps the State party to recognize and protect the rights of all indigenous communities to orrnn,,develop and control the lands whioh they traditionally occupy, includine water and subsoil r€sources, and to safegilard their right to use lands not exclusivily occupied bl ther,n, to which they havc traditionally had access for their subsistenc,e, in accorOance with the Commiuee's General F.ecornmendation No.

23te arfi' taking into acoount ILO Convention No.


169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.
It also urgathe State party, in co:rsultatim with &e indrgenous communities concerned, (a) to de;arcate or ottte*uise identi& the laqds u*rictr they traditionally occupy or use, (b) to establish.adequate procedures, and to defias clear and j-ust criteria to resolve land clairns by indigenous communities within the domestic judicial system while taking due account of relevant indigenous customary laws- It is widely acknowledged thar Guyanese public life is beset by long-standing t2.
that this also greatly racial and ethnic tensions between Afto and Indo-Guyanes€ and affects indigenols peoples.
This was highligtrted by the CERD in March 2003 and 2004 in two decisions made pursuant to its Urgent procedure: Many intergovelnmental and non'govmnmental organizations and United Nations agencies qgreo th4t the vicious circle of political and ethnic tensions has brought Guyana to a sbte of political instability which adverssly affects human rights and has weakened civil society, increasing racial violence, poverfy and exclusion among indigenous population groups, and haqpering both the administration ofjustice and the application of human rights standards.2o The UN Special Rapporteur on Contemporary Forms of Racisnr, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobie and Related Intolerance, who visited Guyana in July 2003, reached the same Indigenous peoples are not direetly part of these political and racial conclusion.zl tensions and are largely exoluded from attempts to reach a durable solution to these long- standing problems.
On this point, the Special Rapporteur observed that: Dialogue and conserisus, if they are to be democratically rneaningful, must embrace the leadership ofthe Amerindian community as a firll participant.

The fact that this sector of society was not involved ia the iafial drafting oft&e 6 May communiqu6 is a ftrther sign of the discrimination and neglect from which it has tr:aditionally su.fifered.z2 t'CERD, General Reeommeadation No.

23; Indigenous peoples, at para.

5.


20 Prevention of Racial Discrimination, including Early Warning Meq&tres and Urgent Action Procedures, Deeision 2(62), Guyana.

LIN Doc.

CERD/C/6?COiDec.2, 2l l\,Iarch 2003, at para.

5.

See, also, Prevention of Raeial Discrimination, including Early WarningMeasures and UrgentAction Procedures, Deeision 1(64), Guyana.

9lvtareh 2004, para.4.


2r Report submitted hy Mr. Doudou Dilne, Spcial Rapporte*r on contemporary forms af raci*n, raeial discrimination, renophabia and rel*ed intolerance.

Mission to Guyna and Trinidad md Tobago.

UN Doc.

E/CN.4/2004/18/Add.

1, 8 January 2A44, at 2. "

fd.

at para.

41.


In otrr view, one of.the primary constraints to effectively addressing indigenous 13. is tiie absinge of enumerated;aghls in GUylese law' While peoples' conceffr$ *O,i**"* the Constitution now iuince 2003) contains some (limited asd untested) guarantses, the in in$jS9pgs peoples.remains mainlv the unae"fying rationale tiit f.gd.rigihts.vested i*g*rJ; #rh* State.
iitir'fii"i"iindgtn*s peoples the lepl sec.ultf and certaintv that is taken for granted by most other citLens and greatty hamper,s their ability to focus on the developrient unA *JffrbAng of their co*monities i"rd peoples, 1s well as their ability to uprroroiheir duties to futurelenerations.
This raak of enumsr?ted righrs is particularly evident in t;re treatment of inligenous peoples' lands, territories and resources in the Amerindian Act 2006, Eart lV - sections 59 - 6a) Indigenous peoples' rights to lands and resourceq for i*1q"",.
are granted by or 14. trti sii*t" t"tf,q than recgguzed g inherent to their status as aboriginal transferred iro* In particular, the State continue$ to rely on colonial era peoples and then t"ggl*it*d, ies* Ao6**oe trorA#g *at all lands, exgeptthose held under private documentary title, sovereignty'.This *iie ofthe vast majority of commonwealth states - continues doctrine - rejwted Uy tfte to appty to intig"tt*s peoples and their lands and tenitories under Guyanese law to this Aay.
A tawsuit"fited by sirindigenous communities in 1998 challenging this position has only proceded to trial inNovember 2007.
.re$ted in the fitlsh Crown (now thi State) upon acquisition "o"rts -of In the same vein, the Amerindian Act 2006 remains, like its p-redecessor of 1951, 15. a largely adrninistrative 'instrument that allows the exercise of some indigenous authority s*bject to the overriding and generally arbitrary power of the State, g"|ffifte inherent rights of autonomy and self- rather than one tt1gi ru.og$i""s and gu"t*t.*t governmeRt derived from indigenous peoples' right to self-determination.
{{ The Amerindian Act 2005 discriminatec against iudigenous peopleo This section will summarizb a few of the main areas in which the Amerindian Act 16.

2006 discriminates against indigenous peoples.r Underyminqs In4igenq$[PeoPf eq' trntfqfiry AgIbg Apt'L.T'featqpept glllanqs,.and Re$oFfces contravenq iFtornatignal l8w allg!

rights to lands, territories and 17.


The Act'sffillopbs' resources is substantially at odds witfi the recognition and protection of those rights in ard gBarantee international human rigtrts taw.

The Act does not adquately t$tf} indigenous peoples or tieir communities' rights to own and control their traditional lands' and does little to alleviate the legal insecurity they have teniiories and experienced in this respect for generations.
Moreover, there is no possibility for regularizing territsrial *ghts as, contrary to indigenous peoplel'_ cultures and traditional tenure systems, the Act cnly allows forindividual villages to hOld title- -resources 23 Act No.

6 of2006 I l. Rights to lands, territories and resaurce$ nre not recognized ani procedures for resolving land issues are arbitrary a*d.unfair fhe ict f-ails ts recognize and spwi$ any rights tlrat corld form the basis for tg.
ten'itories and delimitation, dernarcation uiA tiUing of inAigeoou$ pe,ople$' 91d:, re$ourc€s.

In particulaf,, thero is no iecognition and proteetio1r of indigenous peoples" communal properry rights that arise from and are grounded in traditional ownership systems inciuding inaigencus Beoples' customary l1ws.
All that is provided for is a procedure for apflying]or title-or extension of title that results in a decision determined sotely and * in 156'ubJ"n"" of enumerated criteria in the form ofrights * arbitrarily by the Minister of Amerindian Affairs {sections 59-64).
In the case ofindigenogs peoples, land titling procedures shsuld be designed to regularize pre-existrng rights and this cannot be done*,ii the undedying rights ari not reeognized and fsrm the basis for delimitation, dem*rcation anO titiing Si"outd the Minister deem it appropriate to issue title or to extend an existing title, thereis no guarantee that the title issucd will bear any correspondence to indigenou-S peoplesr customary land tenure and resource use sy$tems or the attendant rights in international law.
The absence of enumerated rights also makes it diffreult to see on what grounds 19. indigenous peoples would be able to appeal the decision of the Minister as provided for in ddion 4,4 in the Act.

On what basis will a judge evaluate the validity or propriety of the Minister's decision if the law itself provides no oriteria or specifiel ryy rights that would limit the Minister's discretion?
No other law, with the hypothetical exception of the Constitutional provision requiring protection of indigenous peoples' ways of life - a term that is not Jpecific enough in the context of regularizing land tenure rigt*s - establishes limits to the Minister's discretion.

20.
20.

Under the Act therefor€, the Minister has unfettered discretion to make decisisns about land titling through'd procedure that is arbitrary and lacks transparency and legal certainly for indigenous p€oples due to the absence of enumerated rights or criteria.

Also, the possibility for indigenous peoples to successfully appeal decisions that are inconsistent with their rights are minimal given that the law fails to set justiciable limits to the Minister's discretion.

2.
2.

Untitled Indigenous Communities cannot Hold and Excrcisc Rights The failure to adequately recognire and guaf,antee indigenous peoples' rights to 21. lands, territories and resources should also be viewed in light of the fact that the Act differentiatos between titled and untitled communities for the purpose of holding and exercising rights, and the vast majority of its purported protections do not apply to untitled communities and untitled, but traditional, lands.
The basis for this is found in section 2, which, contrary to international laq defines and limits indigenous peoples' ownership and other rights to lands and resource$ to only those lands which the State has decided to recognize by issuing title."'

24 Among otlreis, Judgment of tte Inter-Anre,rical Ccnrt of Human Righfs in tbe case of The lWyagpa (Sumo) hfigeno$ Commrnity of Arras Tingni v. the Re,prblic of Nicaragua 3l Atigust 2@l,Inter-Am.

Court on Hunlan Nghts, furies'C, No.

79 (2001), at parr.
79 (2001), at parr.

149, 151; Iner-Ainerican Commission on Hurnas Rights, l0 3.

Rivers and other bcdies of lffater are Excluded from Indigenous Title ZZ.

The Act u*fod"*lall subterran€aJr waters, rivers and creeks and other bodies of watef from indigU*t peOples' trtle {tnter alia, sec.53)' Much of Guyana is covered by tropical rainforJsts thaisontain tens of thousands of rivers and creeks.
Excluding these i"dtgenous hnJ1itter is not only centrary to indigenous c'ustomary tenure rights, it til from land titt"t. egaltionattYl Jhe S$te has used this also a priari e""t r;; provision as grounds fur- issuing numerous river mining per'mits within titled areas' sometimes in ctose proximity tJhouses and village sehools and with severe negative peoples' subsistence rights and health' As Robert oorrrgqort""s for Goodland, fsrqer,freaA:of ttre W"tli Barrk's Environment Departrnent otserves 'Missile 6 nr* orri"er mining prevalent in the upper naaearuni and ersewhere) persist ;;F 6*ouf,;; AG permits their en;iorynental costs to Le externalized onto the Indigenous peoples, and is unwilling to enforce its own laws and regulations'"zs -iilei*e;dS r"*r i*!"
lhe €t-to Section O oitfr* JgAg Mining e* $ates ttrat'islubj€ 4, The.

{.ct lliscriminates with Regard to ownership of subsoil Resources ollpr provisions of Zi.

the hn;s of Guyana stratl yest in the State'"tu On this basis' this Part, all mineralr **fti" subsoil minerals are also excluded from indigenous land titles.
However, section I of the ftfi"i"S Act provides that, as an exception tI tne general principie.of State ownership of minerals, that pefsons holding title issusd prior tJteo3 have the right to own, mine and Oirpor" of base minerals fiDdd in those lands (not including gol4 silver, precious stones and petroleum).

tndigenous pmples' title to lands, tenitoiies and re$ources traditionally orrupi*O and used cfJ*fy ptlAuf.
* 1903 - indeed it can be traced to pre-colonial times' Therefore, apptying:th;principte of non-disotiminatior!
indigenouspeoples must also be recognized u* o*oir* of at least base minerals within their traditional lands and territories and iiris is not renected in.the Act.27 This must also include ownership of these minerals within titled areas, otherwip€ the title instnrments themselves, to the extent that they deny oft* -Dec' ;tgrr" of the inrer-Amican toteOo Di$ict 6fene1, 12 ftcb€r arc ncf fimited to tiose firoeerty 1nt"f$ 27, 2002' tlt; a&, Repart No' 4W04, Case 12.053'.
h{1y" lndigenous 2004, at pata" I 17 (fsotnates-omitted): Repoft N. 75/A2, Case ltlo ll.l,m, h/hxy and Carde Dall Onitd State€), oEA/Ssr.UVff.ttO, O*.

46, at *ra Co***itio - tuiran righa sy*w have rwgnized th{ ttY propetty rights G that are ak€adv rwgnized by ptorc&n by fu t;-* slatos or tlrat ue &frFd by domestic law, b{ rdtEr that the dght to property nas I autonomfrrs of the 'Eystcm has righm law.
In this sflts, the roe"tti* thgt fhe prwerty rlgls sf idigenous peoples arc not defirFd excfusively by @wieCg€d tbat indigeoous cornnunal e1$itt€rncnrs withi; ; d;t prWsty that aris tom,ad} is g!ilIded in irdigmus c|Isom and fiadition Guyr*o, Srial and Erwironmeital Impct Reconnaissanee al Gald Dredging on Indigenous pioptes in the tlpper Mmaruni.
A Repott fg P" Upper lvfazaruni Amerindian District Cogicit ard the-Am€rindian- Peoples Association, October 2005, at 14. legpl regine, htt hso inph* tl met"rnoaf l"rta* dlaal tiio4 tu Se", also, Section 5 of tlreState LandsAct.

,, h;;;;; G,'S:.

to Decisions about eoaya, Indigenoue Paoples' Farticipatory_Sgbf g ryqF."

Natgral Resource e*sa"tid.
The-More Fudamenal knie of What Ri8lrtq l1$Se-pus Peoples have in urdnmourc"* 22 Arizana Journal af Int'l and Comp Low & at 10, 2005 -- 'Purstunt to tlre norm m* howwer, indigenoG peoples mrr$t ilot be denied subsurface and mine.ral rights at: "i"r"<irot*itrtien, such where htro://\rww.law.arizone€du/jopnralslailgvAJlcl-?0051vo1221/t/ol2?l-.hU4 accorded othswise rig*r are landorrnes.t' Available - ,t n 1l subsoil rights, should be viewed es uncompensated and non-consensual takings of traditionally-owned indigenous property' There is some evidence that indigenous peoples were mining gold, precious 24. stones and other minerals at the time of European arrival in Guyana.
They certainly have been since the mid-196 century and eontinue to do so today.

However, the Act explicitly excludes traditional mining from the scope of 'traditional rights' and,.

instead, refers to q presumably revocabl", 'tniditional mining privilege' (sec.

Z).zu Additionally, given that mining and minerals fall within the soope of lands and resources traditionally owned by indigJnous peoples; there is no valid teason that such resource rights should not be inclided in indigenous peoples' title.
The South A*ican Constitutional Court, among in 2003, holding that under indigenous law and by virtue others, reached tlir of traditional occupation and use, ownership of subsoil minerals may also vest collectively in indigenous peoples.2e "ottil.tsion In a statement that is highly relevant to the situation in Guyana with regard to 25. section I of the Mining Act and ihe exclusion of mineral rights from indigenous peoples' title, the South African Constitutional Court further conoluded that In this case, the racial discrimination lay in the failure to recognise and accord protection to indigenous law ownerihip while, on the other hand, according protection to registered title.
The inevitable impact of tbis differential treatnsnt was racial discrimination against the Richtersveld Community which baused it to be dispossessed of its land rights.

.

{though it is correst that the Precious Stones Act did not form part of the panoply of legislation giving offect to "spatial apartheid", its inevitable impact was to deprive the RiclrtersvelA Comrnuoity of i* indigenous law-rights in land while recognising, to a significant exten!

the rights of registered owner$.

"u : 5.


Title mry only be Held by Individual Villages Denying Tenitorial Rights and Rights of Freedom of Arsociation 26.

Another major defect in the Act is that under the Act only individual villages may hold title.
The crucial function of holding title is purposefully excluded from the 2$ Section 2 reads: "traditional right "mean$ any subsistence right or privilege, in existence at the date of the commencement of this Act, which is owned legally or by custom by an Amerindian Community or Amerindian group and which is exercised sustainabiy in accordance with the spiritual relationship which the Amerindian Communiiy or Amerindian g'oup has with the land, but it does not include a traditional rnining privilege."
ze Alexkor Ltd and the Republic of South ,4frica v. The Richtersveld Cammanity and Others CCT 19/OS, para 64 {2003), Seg also, decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Delg*nuuk* v. British Columbio, [199?]

3 S.C.R.

1010, at 1086 (per Lamer CJ) -- "aboriginal title also encompass [sic] mineral rights, and lands held pursuant to aboriginal title should be capable of exploitation in the same way...," 30 Alexkor, id.qtpara.
99. t2 functions of a Disuiet Council in the Act- The result to date has been and oontinues to be under the Act, the,(ftrther) fragme.ntation of once cortigqou$ indigenous lands and territories into,small islands of titled lands, whioh are and will continue to be surrounded and intersected by areas of State Lands that are often issued to logging and mining interests.
The prmeding not only under*rines traditional indigenous land tenure systems, 27. which v€st paf,aluount ownership,(territorial) rights in indigenous'peoples and subsidiary (Iand) rights in sub-entities, such as villages and clans, it also contributes to ths destnrction of tradiiioaal resource management systems and traditional knowledge, both of which are integral to maintaining subsistence resoursss and are inter-connected with ftldamental spiritual pra6ices; undennines socio-culfufal integfity by disrupting traditional systems of exchange based rociprocal kinship ties and obligations; sometimes causes conflictbetwffin communities; at a minimunl hinders the free exsrsise ofrigttts of freedom of association for political and crrltural purpose$; and in general damages the foundations of indigenous peoples' integrity as distinst peoples with rights guaranteed by international law.
28.

Denying indigenous peoples' communities the right to freely associate with each other for the purposcs of holding and exercising prope*y rigt*s is also contrary to the sta&d wishes of a large number of communities in various regions of Guyana.

One of the primary demands of the Upper,Mazaruni commrxrities in their law suit is that title be vested collectively and jointly in all six of the plaintiff communities through a District Council.
The same request has been submitted to thc State by the six indigenous communities of the,Moruca sub-reglon Region 1; a request that has been disregarded for almost four years.lt All of the tffipisiana communities of Region t have requested that title be vested collectively and joint$ in a co-uncil on behalf of their respective villages rather than individually in village councils, as have the nine sommunities of Region 2.
Among others, these communities point out that it would be impossible for them to divide common areas amotrg the constituent villages and that some villages simply could not extend existing titled areas individually as they are surrounded on all sides by other titled villages.

6.

Somc Indigenour Communities arelncligible to Hsld Title 29.

Purzuant to sec.
Purzuant to sec.

60, a number of indigenous communities may be ineligible to apply for title at all under tlre Act, This section requires that untitled indigenous communities musf as a prior condition to applying for title, have been in existence for 25 years'and consisted of at least 150 persons for the five years prior to the application.
This provision equate$ indigenous peorples' land and resource rights with occupation and use of specific sites rather tharr occupation and use of traditional lands and territories and ignores the fast that these communities, bwause of prevailing ecological conditions and cultural traditions, traditionally move around within their traditional territory.
Moreover, for indigenous peopleq establishing valid rights and title to lands is not a function of 3r Formql Application Seeking Reeagnition af the Land and Resource Rights af Six Amerindian Yillages of by the Monrca Amerindian Land Council with Support &,om Montca Sib-Regton, Region l. @ the ArnerirdianPeoplcs As$oaiation of Guyara NIaY2w2.

l3 populationsizg but rathera,funstion of holding and exercising o:n'nership rights pursuant to applicable customary laws.

7.
7.

The Act:does ilot Prohibit tr'orcible Relocation or Compulsory Takings There is no prohibition-of;forcible relocation of indigenou$ peoples in the Act and 30. the Act also does not proiride adequate protection for indigenous peoples in relation to compulsory acquisition af'their titled lands.

This is also the case in connection with the establishment of protected areas (tnfra,para.

93-5).
93-5).

In principlE there would be no need in the Act for protection a.gainst'compulsory acquisition of traditional, but untitled, lands 'as these by law are vested in the State.

The Act fails ta explicitly address forcible relocation and eompulsory agquisition and, therefore, these matters are regulated by extant lawsr,nsne of,whichprohibit takings of indigenou$ landrs or forcible resettlement.

In a statement released to the press in 2005 shortly before the enactment of the 31.
Act, the Ministly oJ Afnerindian Affairs stated that * erindian lands wsuld now be grant€d under the StEte +qq4s Act which is absolute and forever.

This means lands iannot,be taken away uflless, as is tlre aase for all Grryanese, it is done by the State for public purpos€s.

IM'hen,this is done a legal process must be ,followed and the State is required to pay comppnsation.
'3' This ,statem€nt, and the corresponding lack of protection accorded in the Apt or other laws, fails to account for indigenous peoples' pr6f,otrnd relationships tottrciritraditional lands and territories and stands in sharp contrast to international law, which requires that indigenous peoples' free, prior and informed Gonsent be obtained in relation to forcible relocation and takings of traditionally-owned indigenous lands, territo-ries arid resources.s t2 Qrr"$io* and Answers oattp AnisitdianBill2005 ftepar€d A the Gosernmen* Infolmation Agency), Guyana Chronicle, 19 October 2005, 3 Among others, International Labour Organizatior!
Convention No.

169, Art.

16; and U.N. Cruiding Prineiples on'Internal Dirylacement, VCN.4ll998l53lfudd 2.

February *'statos are under a particular obligation to protect against the 11, 1998, d para.
9, - displacement of indigenous peoples, minorities, pe€sants, pastordists and other groups with a special dep.elrdenoy olr and attachment to their lands-" The UN Principles were consid€red illustrative of tlpe obligations of Ststes-Parties under Article 22 of the Arnerican Convention ofllumarr Riglrts by the Inter.American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Moiwana Vjllage v. Suriname Judgment of 15 June 2005, Inter'Am.

Cour, on Hum,an Rights, Selies C, No.

124, atpra ul.
124, atpra ul.

The Court further stated that the Guiding Principles "are baseid upm oristing internntional hunranitarian law and human rights standards."

l4 Amerindian P&pt* Assocla{ion ot Gu,yana (APAI: The APA is a national indigenous,peoples' organization con$tituted under the laws of Guyana in 1'991; lt is an asSociatisn of cornmu4ity units located in Amerindian cornlnunities throughout Guyana with a central office in Georgetown.
A Oommunity unit is a group of at least 1O persons within an lndigenous villag€, T,he APA is a member of the lntemational Alliance of Indigenous and Tribal:Peopl€g of the Tropical Forests €nd the Coordinating Body of Indigenous Organizations of the Amazon Basin (COICA).

Address: 334 'B' East Street, South Cummingsbut'g, Georgetown, Guyana.
-Ph/Farc 8t92r22,&.81,50's-rnbil: apacgi$a@networF$ouvan?.com Guyange Organisation fur Indigqtous Peoples (GOIP): GOIP is a national indigenous peoples' organiSation that was resuscitated in 1991 and registered under the laws of Guyana.

GOIP is a member of the Garibbean Organisation of lndigenous Peoples (COIP).

Address: Lot 11 Camp Stregt, Newburg, Georgetown, Guyana.
E.mai | : ogi o2@O@holma il, oom l5 APPENDIX 2 A submission of the Guyanese Organization of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP) to the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) on Tuesday 8th July, 2008 The Guyanese Organization of Indigenous Peoples (GOIP) is grateful for this opportunity to present some of its concerns to the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC).

Most of the below-mentioned issues were raised by indigenous communities and individuals within the GOIP’s membership in Regions 1, 2, 5, 7, 9 and 10 in particular.
These concerns will be divided under the headings of:- The role of the Amerindian Affairs Ministry, Mr. Stephen Campbell, The desire for a more enlightened terminology and vocabulary, and Trafficking in People (TIP).

The role of the Amerindian Affairs Ministry The announcement of the creation of an Amerindian Affairs Ministry in 1993 was warmly welcomed by the GOIP, since it was something the Organization had been lobbying for prior to 1992.
Unfortunately, it seems a formidable body of indigenous opinion in Guyana would be in dismay at, in particular, the highly politically partisan nature this institution has become over the past fifteen years.

In the advent to the 2006 General Elections, the GOIP was particularly taken aback by the then Amerindian Affairs Minister being involved in political campaigning under the guise of “community outreach” with the use of tax-payers’ funds.

The GOIP requests that this practice be discontinued.
The GOIP however sees the necessity for this Ministry, and feels it should be restructured into a more decentralized entity with a higher operating budget.

The Ministry generally needs more competent and better –equipped field staff.

The GOIP however lauds the work the Ministry has been doing so far in the areas of educating the Toshaos and Village Councils in responsibilities of Administrative work, HIV/AIDS education etc.
and our Association is willing to work with the Ministry to help educate the communities in areas of stemming the scourges of drugs and alcohol abuse and other social ills affecting segments of Guyana’s indigenous population.

Mr. Stephen Campbell The GOIP wants to have veteran Indigenous Land Rights activist of the early 1960’s, Mr. Stephen Campbell, officially recognised as Guyana’s National Indigenous hero.
One tangible way of doing this is to ensure Mr. Campbell’s profile and his life and work become a major part of the annual indigenous heritage month activities every September.

After all, one motive for the recognition of September as indigenous heritage month was the fact that Mr. Campbell’s historic first entry in to Parliament was on 10th September, 1957.

Today, heritage month activities are held with little or no references to the proactive and pioneering land rights struggle of this great man.
Nearby Trinidad, whose indigenous population is facing extinction with a number of about three hundred (300) persons based mostly in the town of Arima, holds an annual festival each October in honour of that island’s indigenous hero, Hyarima.

Impressive traditional ceremonies take place around a prominent golden statue of Hyarima in Arima which was specially created in his honour.
The GOIP would like to 1 have similar respect paid to Mr. Stephen Campbell in Guyana, particularly in light of the highly-touted boast by Guyana’s authorities that this country’s indigenous population surpasses fifty thousand (50,000), the highest in the Commonwealth Caribbean.
The GOIP reiterates its call that “Indigenous Heritage Day, or “Stephen Campbell Day”, 10th September, should be a holiday for Indigenous Guyanese, not a national holiday, since an argument was made that Guyana already has too many holidays at the time that 5th May was added to Guyana’s annual holiday list as Indian Arrival Day.
The GOIP notes that neighbouring Surinam has granted 9th August as a national holiday just two years ago in recognition of that country’s Indigenous heritage, with a minimum of fuss.

Desire for more enlightened terminology and vocabulary Consistent with modern trends adopted by indigenous peoples worldwide, the GOIP is highly desirous that Guyana’s first peoples not lag behind the rest of the world in terminology changes etc.

We propose that these changes be evolutionary, rather than revolutionary.
For example, our North American relatives now proudly label themselves as “Native Americans “ as opposed to the less dignified, more antiquated brand “American Indian” etc.

Likewise, in Guyana the GOIP is pressing for the media, educational institutions and others responsible for socialisation processes to apply a more enlightened vocabulary.

For example, “Toshao” should officially replace “Village Captain”, “Indigenous Nation” or “Indigenous People” should replace “Amerindian Tribe”, and so on.
Even the Arawak Nation is beginning to show a preference for the more educated term “Lokono Nation”, as they knew themselves for thousands of years before the 12th October, 1492, Columbus invasion.

The GOIP also proposes more awareness of the original names of those Indigenous communities that were given names of churches etc.

by missionary and neo-colonial forces over the past 500 years.
Examples of these include Zariwa, the original name for St. Ignatius in Region 9 Marriaba now known as Santa Rosa in Region 1, and Kairimap, the original name for St. Monica in Region 2.

We however have no objection to the St. Ignatius Church retaining its identity within the Zariwa reserve, for example.

The GOIP congratulates Moraikobai, formerly St. Francis in Region 5 for its laudible and proactive community effort to return to its pre-colonial name since 1990.
This is very much in keeping with global trends today.

We anticipate other communities will follow Moraikobai’s lead in the future in this regard.

Trafficking in People(TIP) The GOIP is abhorred at the “Ostrich’s head buried in the sand” position taken by Guyana’s authorities vis-à-vis the trafficking of indigenous females for prostitution purposes in different parts of Guyana.
Nobody will get anywhere with the continual denial that this serious concern exists, or the excuse that “women of all races are involved in the world’s oldest profession in Guyana.” We should be anxious instead to ascertain the true magnitude of the TIP menace throughout the country.
The GOIP firmly objects to the practice of targeting indigenous girls, some as young as 12 years old, for prostitution purposes in locations ranging from mining camps in the hinterland to hotels, brothels and beer gardens in urban areas.. Tourism interests need to be part of this anti-prostitution campaign, and not be promoting it.
We find 2 the concept that “an indigenous or ‘bok woman’ makes an ideal prostitute” as most obnoxious, and this negative ethnic profiling and stereotyping needs to be aggressively confronted.

For this and other reasons, the GOIP objects to the speed at which Gambling Casino legislation is being promoted by Guyana’s authorities, as we feel indigenous women will again be prime targets to serve in strip-joints etc.
that are usually part of financially-extravagant but morally devoid tourism-propelled packages that will benefit from such legislation.

The GOIP feels a more aggressive educational campaign benefiting the indigenous population generally is necessary before large scale tourism and extractive economic entities are allowed to be set up base in areas that will directly affect the welfare and future of indigenous communities.
3 SUBMISSION TO THE ETHNIC RELATIONS COMMISSION (ERC) ON THE PERCEIVED NEEDS OF THE AMERINDIAN COMMUNITY IN GUYANA TO “FOSTER THE PROMOTION OF HARMONIOUS ETHNIC RELATIONS IN GUYANA” BY THE AMERINDIAN ACTION MOVEMENT OF GUYANA (TAAMOG) ON TUESDAY 8TH JULY, 2008 AT THE ERC SECRETARIAT APPENDIX 3 INTRODUCTION The Amerindian Action Movement of Guyana (TAAMOG) wishes to inform the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) that it is pleased to be associated with this historic consultation exercise to promote harmonious ethnic relations in Guyana.
TAAMOG recognizes the hard work the ERC is doing to carry out its mandate to achieve its goal of harmonious ethnic relations in our country and more particularly to facilitate a conducive climate to attain the wider goal of national development objectives in our multi-ethnic society.
TAAMOG is therefore of the view that each ethnic group in Guyana has a fundamental role to play in shaping our development process and not to be diverted from this course by petty differences which frustrate our focus and in the final analysis deprive our future generations from the benefits of our vision.
The Amerindian sector in our country stands ready to participate in the development process, but our pace is often times affected by the lack of resources to bring about the social and economic development of our communities.

Mr. Chairman, the Amerindian population is on the increase which now consists of 68,819 persons out of the National population of 751,223 (Bureau of statistics 2005: Table 10).
But while the numerical strength of Amerindians has increased over the years they continue to live below the poverty line at 78.6% since the 1993 household income and expenditure survey (HIES).

The 1997 Guyana Survey of Living Conditions (GBLC) conducted by the Bureau of Statistics shows that in terms of per capita expenditure, the Indigenous population is much poorer than any other ethnic group in Guyana.
The Executive summary of Renshaw 2006 report for the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) on “Guyana: Policy note on Guyana’s indigenous people” revealed “there are presently very few economic opportunities available in the hinterland; an alternative would be to develop a specific project for the hinterland, possibly a hinterland development fund, which would be demand driven and would support training, capacity building, community infrastructure and economic development or income generation projects” (page 4).
The said report also revealed “the cost of living is very high in the hinterland, especially in the most remote regions, and there are very few opportunities for employment or to 1 earn an income.” The report further stated “because of the lack of opportunities many young people that have finished school leave their village to look for employment” (page 30).
Mr. Chairman, it is within the poverty-status context of Guyana’s Indigenous People this submission is made and TAAMOG wishes to highlight some of the perceived needs of the Amerindian sector in Guyana to your esteemed Commission.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT a) Establishment of a Hinterland And Development Fund.
The Government should take urgent steps to establish a Hinterland Development Fund (HDF) to provide finance for economic projects or income generation projects, capacity building, community infrastructure and training in the hinterland Amerindian communities of Guyana.

Donations to this fund can come from the government, the UNDP, IADB, European Union, agencies, individuals, companies and other countries.
A Board comprising persons committed to the development of the hinterland Amerindian communities should manage this fund.

b) Promotion of hinterland agriculture: A proactive and well equipped hinterland unit needs to be created in the Ministry of Agriculture to promote the development of Agriculture in hinterland Amerindian communities by providing technical support and other related inputs to hinterland farmers.
c) Marketing agency: A marketing agency needs to be established to specifically market Amerindian products both locally and externally.

This agency can be housed in a building of adequate size in Georgetown where Amerindian products would be on display and sale.

This agency will aggressively pursue a marketing strategy for Amerindian products in all the ten regions of Guyana.
Funds for the setting up of this Marketing Agency can come from the UNDP, IADB, World Bank, European Union and other countries, local agencies, individuals and companies.

This Marketing Agency is needed because Amerindians are finding it difficult to locate reliable Markets for their products.

2 RELIABLE MARKETS Generally Markets for Amerindian Products are oftentimes unreliable.
Coast Landers purchase their products at very low prices taking advantage of their poverty status; while they negotiate the prices for their products with the coast landers, the coast landers refuse to pay the prices Amerindian call for their products.
SHIPPING PORT FACILITIES To enable Amerindians of Region 1 to take advantage of the Caribbean, European and North American Markets for their products, a shipping port with its attendant facilities should be established at Morawhanna in the Mabaruma sub region.

Morawhanna is strategically positioned since it is near to the Atlantic Ocean.
TRANSPORTATION Amerindian communities in the ten regions in Guyana are generally affected by the lack of adequate transportation facilities to take their agricultural produce from farm to market.

This includes river and land transportation.

The North West steamer for example which goes to Mabaruma on a fortnightly basis from Georgetown, has limited space for hinterland products for the Georgetown Market.
BETTER ROADS Roads in the hinterland Amerindian communities need to be built for farm to market access.

Many of the roads in the hinterland are in deplorable conditions and they need fixing; for example the access road to the Mainstay/Whyaka Village and the Kumaka to Kwebanna Road in the Moruca sub region in Region 1.

3 COMMUNICATION Remote Amerindian communities continue to suffer from the lack of adequate communication systems.
The radio system continues to be used but at times they become dysfunctional which A better way of communicating with Georgetown, within the administrative regions and further a field needs to be studied and implemented.

The communication system at Bina Hill in the North Rupununi should be emulated where information technology systems have been established.

Foreign and other donors should be approached for assistance in this regard.

frustrates residents.


INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT The Industrial development of hinterland Amerindian communities can play a great role in the provision of employment and community development so that residents do not have to seek jobs on the coastland or to migrate to Georgetown and live.

In this regard TAAMOG recommends that feasibility studies be conducted in the hinterlands communities to determine the establishment of small scale Industries.
MICRO PROJECTS FUNDING A micro projects programme needs to be established, similar to the EU funded projects to provide funding for hinterland development projects and their implementation.
TRANSFER OF ROYALTIES FROM MINING ACTIVITIES Section 51 (3) of the Amerindian Act 2006 states that “The Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GG&MC) shall transfer 20% of the royalties from the mining activities to a fund” TAAMOG would like to know which fund the royalties have been transferred to, and what is its present status?
The royalties transferred should be used for the implementation of community development projects or should be transferred into the Proposed Hinterland Development Fund (HDF) 4 AMENDMENTS TO THE AMERINDIAN ACT 2006 Section 53 of the Amerindians Act should be amended to provide for impact studies to be carried out first before the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) intends to issue a permit, concession, license or other permission to a miner to conduct mining activities on or nearby Amerindian village lands.
This is to ensure that the impact of mining on the village will not be harmful.

But all that Section 53 of the Act is saying is that if the GGMC intends to give a miner permission to conduct mining activities on or nearby Amerindian village lands all it has to do is to “Notify the village and satisfy itself that the impact of mining on the village will not be harmful”.

TAAMOG considers this a gross disrespect and lack of recognition to an Amerindian village which can give rise to serious conflict.
Section 53 of the Act should also make it pellucidly clear to the miner that his permission for mining activities received from the GGMC is invalid without the consent of a village General Meeting.

This is for small and medium scale mining.

MINING ON OR NEARBY AMERINDIAN COMMUNITIES SHOULD BE PROHIBITED The GGMC should cease the issuing of mining permission for mining activities to take place in or nearby Amerindians communities.
Communities such as Micobie and Isseneru are experiencing severe discomforts as a result of mining activities on or nearby their communities which is a violation of their constitutional rights to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes.

The Isseneru community which recently received title for its lands is now before the courts for resisting coastland miners who are conducting mining activities within the boundaries of their village.
In the Amerindian Act there is a difference between an Amerindian village and an Amerindian community.

An Amerindian village has title to its lands, while an Amerindian community does not have title to its lands and is more vulnerable.

(Sections 13 (1) (d) and section 86 & 87).


5 GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ENTERING VILLAGE LANDS Government officials entering Amerindian village lands do not have to get permission from the village council, but they are required to inform the village council about the nature of their business; their length of stay, as well as complying with the village rules (Section 8 (1) of the Amerindian Act).
Many government officials are not complying with this Section of the Act and are not respectful therefore to the village council.

Government officials should be made aware that they have to provide vital information to the village council once they enter Amerindian village lands.

AMERINDIAN REPRESENTATION a) GGMC and the GFC.

To strengthen efforts at ensuring that the rights and interests of indigenous people are respected and recognized in resource utilization and management.
TAAMOG would like to see Amerindian NGO representation on the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) and the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) b) The Indigenous People Commission (IPC).

TAAMOG would like to see the earliest establishment of the IPC as a body to enhance the status of indigenous people in our multi-ethnic society.

c) The National Toshao Council (NTC).


To strengthen efforts of ensuring good village governance and to coordinate the development of Amerindian villages and communities, TAAMOG would like to see the government allocating funds and establishing a secretariat for the NTC so that it can get down to the task of carrying out is functions as enshrined in the Amerindian Act 2006 (Section 41).

d) The Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC).


TAAMOG notes that while the ERC does not require the representation of any particular ethnic group, the composition of the Commission reflects the dominant ethnicities and this being so now suggests that the ERC has Amerindian representation.
This is also in keeping with the United Nations Committee on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination recommendation that the “state party ensures that the ethnic composition of This recommendation was made at CERD’s sixty eight session held in March 2006 in Geneva.
inclusive as possible.” the ERC be as 6 SOCIAL ISSUES a) The Name of Guyana’s National Airport After the name change from “Timehri International Airport” to the “Cheddi Jagan International Airport, Timehri”, our national newspapers should write the abbreviation “CJIAT” and not ‘CJIA’.

But while “Timehri” is mentioned when referring to the Airport name e.g “(CJIA), Timehri,” it is reflected as a location and not as part of the name change.

Our national newspapers should be alerted on this matter.
“Timehri” is an Arawak (Lokoho) word which means “Rock full of painted pictures”.

b) Legal Aid Hinterland–based Amerindians oftentimes do not have access to legal aid services as a result of the high cost of retaining a lawyer.

Many of them appear in the courts without legal representation where the consequences can be severe, while others are deprived of legal advice on many of their problems.

TAAMOG therefore recommends that legal aid services be extended to the hinterland Amerindian communities.
c) Sports Involvement and Development Hinterland Amerindian communities are excluded from the sports sector of this country.

The communities have good cricketers, footballers and sports persons in the other sport disciplines but we hardly hear them rise to the competitive and national levels.
TAAMOG therefore recommends that both the National Sports Commission and the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sports formulate a hinterland sports programme so that hinterland communities can be involved in sports activities reaching the competitive and national levels.

d) Cultural Development The cultures of Amerindians needs to be developed.
Their songs, music, dances and craft need to move to a higher level, but while some of the tribes are practising their culture, others do not, which calls for a cultural revival programme.

Amerindian languages need to be taught in hinterland schools, starting with the Wapishiana, Macushi, Potamona, Akawaio and Arecuna on the basis that these languages are spoken perfectly in their communities.
The 7 Arawaks, Warraus and Caribs need a languages project because these tribes are in the process of losing their language and moreso their cultural heritage.

TAAMOG recommends that a cultural section should be created in the Ministry of Amerindians affairs to implement action for the revival and development of Amerindian culture.
e) Housing Many Amerindians living in the hinterland regions live under deplorable housing conditions which require that a hinterland housing programme needs to be formulated and implemented by central government.

A consultation process should firstly be carried out with the communities to determine the design of the houses.

f) Health and Nutrition It is said that hinterland communities suffer from chronic malnutrition as a result of the lack of diversity in their diet.
Communities nearby mining areas suffer the brunt of this type of malnutrition since mining activities pollute the rivers and with the noise emanating from engines, game and other wildlife, escape deeper into the forest making it difficult for Amerindians to get their supply of protein.

Apart from this scenario Amerindians in the hinterland hardly eat greens and vegetables.
The health education department of the Ministry of Health should therefore come up with programmes designed to inculcate in Amerindians the nutritional importance of using greens and vegetables in their diets.

The Primary Health Care System is still efficient where Community Health Workers (CHWS) and Medexes are doing a good job.

However there is still the need for qualified resident doctors.
Malaria, HIV/AIDS, TB, water borne diseases and mother to child health care are major health concerns which need to be tackled strategically and with consultation with the local Medexes and Community Health Workers.

TB is a significant problem in some hinterland communities where patients are sent to Georgetown and treated under the DOTS (Directly Observed Treatment Short Course) programme in Georgetown.
TB patients are housed at the Amerindian hostel and this is a concern which must be addressed by the Ministry of Amerindian Affairs since these patients live among other residents at the hostel.

8 g) Education The Government has made significant efforts at ensuring that hinterland teachers are equipped with teaching skills and the construction of more schools.
Notwithstanding these efforts, the government should also strive to ensure that hinterland teachers are given the necessary and basic teaching materials, electricity to push computers and improved facilities for the boarding of students.

While computers are now given to some hinterland schools, teachers need to be trained to operate the computers.

h) Literacy Programme TAAMOG compliments the Government for promoting literacy in our country.
While information is lacking in relation to the areas targeted for literacy programmes, TAAMOG would like to see these programmes reach the more remote areas of the ten administrative regions.

i) Rights to Sub-surface mineral resources Amerindian villages are given legal ownership for the lands they occupy through titleship, yet the mineral resources found under the land do not belong to them, but to the State.
In the interest of Amerindian development in Guyana and in view of the financial constraints that generally affect their development process, TAAMOG recommends that Government positively consider the granting of sub-surface mineral rights to those Amerindian villages that have mineral resources under their lands.

j) Assessment of Working conditions of hinterland workers.
TAAMOG wishes to recommend that an independent assessment be carried out to determine the working conditions of hinterland workers employed by hinterland resource extractive industries and to recommend that corrective action/s be taken if there are any infractions of our national labour laws.

Conclusion TAAMOG wishes the ERC all success in this historic consultation exercise.
9 APPENDIX 4 NATTONAL A1\{ERII\[DAN ENVIRO TII,IS,NTAL EDUCATIONAL D'g\r,EroP,trrnrtT FCIriNDArrOn 6thDF) rZoig Srd CffistD€mcf,tra Grryana S.A Tele; 592-275-O0ll E+nail : a$tonsimon(rffaboo.

com AMERTFilIIAN GROU'PS CONSULTATTONS (ERC) July 8,2008 Presentetion Nationel Amcr{ndian Dwelopment Foundation Acknowledgemcnt The National Amerindian Developmem Formd*ion takes the opporrunity to thank the ERC and its officials for inviting ir or$ilizrtion to the Amerindian Groups Cornrltation.
We ocpect a snrccessfiil *C.onsrlftrtion Forum" and also look forward to "perceived needs" of Amerindians being flddressed fu time to oome.

to sisrs orgmizdions who will sit with us.

It is our We also wish to extend best wisb belief thst efforts to usc this fonrm to its ftllcst will be viewed as a combined collaboration and not aecessarily defind as an orgnni4ional effort.
We acknowledge thst difficrrlties cxist in every sphere of our existence and in search of adequate solutiong for tbem; so.rctimes realize tl rt core is*les are more an imbedded problem dueto orlarrfll and ethnic Ua*gtwnds.
We do hope that with th€ oqlorative- energies garcrated into this coos,rltation by the ERC, positive resrlt* will be furthcoming; ?errccived Needd' of Amerindians are numerous; it s'ill be over ambitious for Amerinditm to' ever a$umc that those needs can be met ov€f, a short period of time.

However, bccanse we wish to crede an ethically integrated culfi$al sooi€fy on We wish all participacs to this con$ltdion" srosess and a fruftfuI future.

to be ormined and prioritized.


lPerceivcd Nceds" d Prcamblc: The best estimate of the Ameridian popdation iadic*e or close to T/o of the total population of &ryana They comprise most of the poe*glon in thc nsmote areas of (hryana Tho bulk of the Amerindigns live in Regions 1,2,7,8 and 9. it to be approximately 50,000 l i,e.

minin€ languAges and.migrUrry patern$.


The Amerindiap peoples are traditionally s€par4ed ftoro each ofher by the natural are nine Amerindian environm@q *iinct Groups in Gryanq na-ely: Arawaksi lvtfiushi' Wqishaoa Warau" Akawaio, Patarrona" Ar,ekrnq Carits and Wai-Wai.

Sore Atorad people can be foutd living arnong the Wapishqna people 8nd their orrm'la+8llagp.
Ext-ernal influences bave conritruted to.living,p$€rTl of Anqindians chaqging over tbe tas played a qggstivc impact on tfu Warcr xrxys used by the yffi.

hrvo seen fb Am€iindiflls or ttrizing ond lobbying to have matters imerindians implemented or corrected,to'tnlke life betcr fu thcm- nmerindians are self employod ard concem,e more in the subsi*ence areas of An€rindians operate otrtside of a cash agricultrrre fishing hrmtsg aod frfg$iy.

economy an-d,are dependaffona subsi$ence way of life.
fhe staffe mr eneriqdian di€t i3 Cqssar4 aod is glrpplenemed by fish and meat urhich they hunt or b,uy,from sholn oqm€d by mn Amerind;rns.- The oost ofthese commodities bV tbc Amerindians.

Howevs, the is irormally availability of fish and med- are in dcprcseion as wderunays qe pollutd and logging playing a part of displacing soooof tbG gooe tht was ma'stailable.

In fight of,these andother &nges "pceqeived n*ds'of Amerindians harrc insreascd and must be address€d to "nharne their srtinil.
Addod to that frilure by the business and wider ociqty to accept, rcmgnize ad r€ryect th social fab,ric of the Amerindians has rnade significam contdhfion$ to ttis dilenma, thtrs bocomiug issres.

througb forums such as this Iilowev€r we hope that with efforts to addrerc th conrultafion fadlitated by the ERC will bcar fruit aod rnrke or society a better one.

NADF s presentation is as fullows.


ot be sffid "e"y hig[ Watcrend Senitetion Although Gryana is termed'Lad of Many ltlaterq mining has destroyed many of the o<isting water ways usod by Amerindians.

For Amqindians to zurvive there is need to amend the con*inrtion rWgCing s/d€r wayc- presemty Amerindians do not own or contnol the water systems €rdsing inthoir deinarcced areas; this bas been a contributing factor to miners taking the libaty to do as ttry pleasc.
T'his practice of miners polluting water ways must oeatn or alternace non polltrting oecnrting sysf€ms put in place.

Where water ways ar€ not usc4 yitlls ad di*ribution systcms n€ be established Anerindian women ad chil&en can bc propcrty suitized ud potable water made easy for domestic and otler prrposeo.

€fiist aod Am€rindians need to be Pit latrines leed to be introduced wke made aware of serious mcdical ads€quic,nocs uften dc,fecdion and other human waste wash dolm to watsr wzys.
In g€nefal urds and *enitation are important resources and need to be exptoited and prdected in thc best way possible.

trey do d €d to Legal cerariccs pn6v It is importarrt to n1nke-,I€al ser-,vices available to tb Amedndian'pqpuldion The NADF in n$oins $wcn aqd aig$ as drysc ary tbe most isolared ar€as.

Calls ronrarOa tofos o4nnization iia cher int€re$ed agencies for srch s€rvices "J*Jd d;;-G; to be made,available,rto Anerindians.
et iurqm4kbtoi tt r. ir i qq,rple that needs tinrrure a diwce so tky can be honorably married.

ts- ccaUse tf;gal $€ryi-fo arc- not arailabie it see-ms inpossible to purnre their rign to-Ue marri€d.

I^qEl services must be p'rovidcd to Amerindians on a n regularbasis sottey are winin the legnl ftamerwork of qr society- "ar-rfat "lbje4s Educetioiial Pnogremmcs A close look at the edrcatioo acoessible ty Apcridian s0rd€4s will sbw the need for to be .dq"d t6 the qrriculum.
Presently better qo"lifi"d teachers and more Schoois in1le hinterland ofrer tes $ubject u,eas then tb€fo coutrerparts in Gcorgetowtl and this needgto be ad&e$s€d.Ir,Iaflre AmeriqdiEn stud€NrB &Om all the nryions need to pr,ogranmcs otrcred by Univasity of Gtryana This will 1"" q"oe*r to A+am make education available to:qiildren 8!d seilts.

There is need for *Strnrmernogfmmes" fq selected or qualified sfud€nts who er(celled during their last sem€stcr.
Gov€tmmed mrst support initidives by NGO's or Grolps that aim 6 undertake snrch ambitious programirei for fu beincrment of edrcdion delivery in the regions.

tk.ftUrc leadem d worffirce of Gryana need to have access Yorlft because,they,qe to programmes thc enhance thsir ryability aod ability to lesd.

Introducing progfirmmes in itre liteness of Youth,SurnmiE, Cbbs, ScixtE d similar'bodics for glrls will enhance their thinking decision making md ma4egpfill qaeocitics.
summer and Youth summit programmes-oa" te Oone O i ggoctirre scale.

pnogfmcs can be done on a rotated schfoute so each village will haw thc opporuuity to host a programme.

Such programmes will make Amerindian yotrb dcvdop skills and abillfy to make bemer contributions to the dwelopmcnt ofGuyana NADF is wi[ing to sit witn ftvermem, Agpncy or interested Sfoups to deal with the logistics and ramifiostions for detrelopin& lnrnching and ft,cilituing srch an initiative.
TrrffuHng In Pcnons this practiee is raryad.

Although it is difficult to A random check oa TIP will rs\r€al th* pgrsue informetion for this svit, it cao be idemifred if ore imeracts in the right eoriroo-em" lvIany Anerindim grrls are brq;gh qrt from their communities with promises of a better life in Goorgptoun or d$er- areas and prt to be unden paid workers particularly on and sex slaves.

A close cM the West Coast ofDemerara and E*sequibo C,oa$ wilt reveal th emem ofthis topic.
ldaybe if the Iffinistry of I{uman Services c relernrnt inqU'tr*ions' institute a monitoring sysiem for Amerindians being otrcred Job$ out of their communities could aot as a of oourse will have to be dre with community officials contnol buffer ,for TIP.

T in,tte rtlm sbpc ud Chincsc being fully nrpportive ofthis initiative.

Senriran orwo*fupsto job seekers to register and under$endrthey bave to be monitorpd while working will help.
educate and e,ncourage Cultural Prcservation rnd Prrciccr, scxud nelatd incidences: Iltugr Arfficking Erposing end expcditing Ttrese and other needs are qraa$ of concerq we hope that the repu€ntation made by the other Amerindian gpupswill b consid€red,and an actionplan dweloped.
National Holiday for Amcrindienr: On Febru4ry I l, 2(n4 theNatioml AmerindiaoEnviroqnentat Educational Dwelopment Foundation (NAED in collaboldon u4h the Ameridian Action Movement of Guyaoa to tlrc 'special Sclect Comittee on the review of CfAAI\dOG)-made I for September lO, to be a holiday Public holidays".

In this pres€sation NADFadvocdd in recognition of lmerindians.as first peoples in CflJrana ad the comibutions they have made over lhe time frame oftl4eir anival.

The comnittoe comprisod of ,Itdr.


Ronald Gajnj (Ctuirman) Ivlrs.

Indranie Chandarpal, Mrs. Shirtey Fd"ruds, Mr. ftrlfikar l\ft$tapha 8d Mr. Rsvindra llet/.

Relevgnt err1racts from the rcport presemed to theNdionat Assembly by the chairman of the committec on Thursday, 2f Aqrr\ 2004 have been submitted to your Commission for perusal.

A copy of this r€port can be hrd ftom Parliament Office, Brickdanl Georgetown.
tt is the R€port of the *Sp€ciatr Select Commiree on The Rerti€'w of Public Holidays" resolution no.l?J2N3.

The status ofholidays anrarded to etlmic grotrps in Caricom ad.the Caribbean reflects: CARICOTW CAilBBEAN COMPAEfSONS Guyana cannot tnLe eirampleo of holi{ays from other'Csibbean countries as each state has diffenerrt holiday strugt-lrres and historic backgromds.
The historical backgfound of counties in the Cffibbean will show that Am€rindians inhabitod most ofthese territories before any other peopte.

For the perrrsal of the E&nic Relations ComniisSiqA NADF has submitted this comparison chart.

It reflects ethic holidays in CARICOM and tbc Caribbean Country Origind Inhdlitrtrts Antigua Barbude Behrmas Berbrdos Belize Dominicr: Gnenrda Dominica was ocorpied first b!

'thc Amerindians.

{ Guyene Tbe original inhebiPrrts were fre Amerindians.
IIaiti Jemaice Montserret Columbus ths encor@ered islaud of Hiqpaniol4 populded by Arawaks rnl492.

Jamaica was s€iltled Amerindiaos- firsa by EAST INDTAN EOLIDAre NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL l. Phagmh 2.

Ei&'ul- Azah 3.

Yqram- Nabi 4.

Diwli 5.

Arft/al DaY NIL NIL NIL Ancridt Holidrys NIL NIL NIL Cnrifima Seiflement Day NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL Arruc/INS OOMMENTS More info to be had Was cotonisd by ec Bdtishinthe ldc€ffirv.

th€ First sigbfied by Pornrguee but setrled by &eBritish b162'1.
No historical ba.kgrurnd that hs Affiidians werethe fu inbaha* Coutrv.

is beliwed rhic of it Ccilumbus tanded on thc bland in 1498 hf tbc Frtrh first s€ttledtbcrc in 1650.

Emancipdion day SiPftted in 1493 and St.Kitts Nevis Originally settled by Am€rindians (Carbs) Srint Lucii SL Vincent And Grenldines Surinam Trinidad rnd Tobrgo lh Aderindiars were ttc first setlcrs, the Fr€nch came ooloniscionin 1650.

\lincent was St. originally setled by Amsindiaas.


Origineqy funerindians inhabit€d ee oautry uptotrc lSbcemrry then aft€r carae se;ttlss Fagtgt4 N€thfflands Germanv.

Both first Am€rindians i3tards werc by sedcd frrom The and sled 1632 by Anglo-hish NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL 1. magw.b 2.

Id-ttt-Fitr 3- Diwali tr&Ul-Fitr l. 2.

Diwali 3.


Indian Anh,al Dav Combiaedholideyr for thc region TI t I Gryana enjoys the most holidays This table shows thc Ameridiam hlvc becn firsc peoples of 9 otrt of 15 Caribbean courtrie,$.

More research too may reflect tha* Am€rindians may have inhabited more countries.

One corrntry has a holiday in rcccgnition of its first pcoples (Belize - Garifuna Settlement Dav).
This table does not reflect well fcr Caricom ad the R4ion as it is evident that one ethnic goup seems to dominate when all oth€r ehic group$ have made inputs into their countql's dwelopment one way orthe otb€r.

Thougfi, acknowledging thfi An€rindians were the fr* recognition bas not been bestowod.

inhabitatrts oftbeir corntries due WHA:T CARIC.OIU EqCIARTER, Or CrVrr.
SOCIETP SAYS: At- a special meeting of the Standing Committee of Mnisters responsible for Legal Affairs (SCMLA) held in Triddad and Tobago on28-29 nEnuary 1997 a draft Charter was commended to Heads of Crovernmem for Jign&rre, Because of the oornmon culfural, historigal aod social bo0ds of the people of the Caribbean Cornmunity the leaders:addressed a broad sp€cuum of hrman indiavors and behavior, including- r Respect for Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms r Human digmty r Religious and cultural diversity .
Rights ofthe indigenous pooples Articlc IO(Vf - Implemaitrtion - is a declaration by Member Sanes oftheir resolve to pay due regard to the provisions oftbe €harter.

(ARTTCLE )Ofl/l) IMPLEMENTATION provisions of this charter.
- The States declare their resolve to pay due regard to the ARTICT,E - XT RIGHIS OT TAE INIIIGENOUS PDOPI;ES The St*es recognise the comibution of the indigemors peoples to the dwelopment process and undertake to coilimre to protoct their historical rights and respect the culture and way of life ofthese peoples.

MIGRATION/ HOW AITTERINDIANS REACUND GTTIANA Lerned men tell us thd tho Amerindians were the fnst discoverers of America.
They say that tlgy beloaged to the Moryoloid group of peoples and rha they crossed into North America from Asia abols 35,000 years ago erriag the ie age.

{"ft-ryorth America was joined to Asia by a bridge of ioe knoum as the Bering F tf"lf Strait pis lri{ee has since broken down md North An€rica and Asia ane nouf s€parate.

There is a Carib lqgend that say, the Caribs once livod on the bright tand of thi moon.
Lookiag doum, they saw rhd tb erth was didy, ad tbough tnat it would be a good thing to go down and clean it up.

So they came down fim thefo home and began to iiean it up.

\trrhen they were finisM and werc ready to r€firn home the cloudJwhich had bome tlrem down nad disappeared- In every lggend there is somc form of tnn[.
It may be that the brigha land of the rnoon was the Cribs home is Asi4 and that th clords ufrich disappcaredwas snow that made the bridge of ice which lras since broken down Afto"thg ice bridge broke downthc Anreriadians sprcad south until they reached Mexico and Florida.

It is believed thd d this point o!€ group comiqred its Sqrthftrd march through the Isthmus,sfP.aoail4 and',into Sorrh America, while sorne otbers took to the sea and began to colonise the West Indian Islands.
Some of tlose u*ro came into $ouh Americs r€aclh€d the coast of Griana about 1,500 yeaf,s ago.

By thetime they had reached their nerhonns, they had divided into four main tribes: Caribq Akawaioq Arawak$ and tle Warraus, The Calibs occupied the lJpper Essequibo" mzanmi, upper C\nrnq Pomeroon and the Barima.

The Akaunrios,ocorpid tnc Essequibo at its junctioq with the Siparuni and were also found,ia the upper Cuytltri Demerara Aad Powoon.

fite Aralvaks, inhabited-tfie legrons of Cortutlme and the Waini.
The Warraus inhabited the swamplaods ofthe Orinoo River ad tbe Barama So tho Amerindians as first peoptes for developmerrt at the same tine dweloped tte dd[s of pres€rying tbeir e,nvironment to €nsur€ a sustainable way of lifr, which wp re uow bqinning to uderstand.
eryplored aod oed up the coutry Justificrtion From tfris presentdion alt arguo€d$ to ac/ud September 106 as a national holiday in recognilion of the Amenindians has bc€o establishod We cannot follow historical and cultural patterns of orther statcs.

A, check on other states hdidey sche&rles will show the cel,ebnati'on and recognition of eveflts irreleraot to Gryana- Am€rindians must be recognized as first peoples and for their work tourards dwclopmem d prescnraim ofthit qffiy.

Why September tOfr.
Why September tOfr.

In honor Mr- Stephen Campbell eNrt€ring Parliament as a lqislator subsequennly nado rgeres€n{qtion to thc British Parliament as time wer$ on.

We have a,unique history and peoples aad *e mrrst deavon pioneered the dwelopment ofGuyana to reoognise those that in 1957, he We have includo highlightod cntrrcts ftom tho *SpGcial Sel€ct Committee on The Review of Public Holidays" captimed'PROPOSALS" # 6.3 and 6.3.3 bullet 3.
Pl find attacleq highlighted sectiofs ofdoqmorado6 the lobby fior a holiday.

A copy of the l\rtrarriage Certificate ftom th€ aoryl€ soeking legal services is also included.

Lend, Mining Sub Surfrcc Righ8 r€Frding NADI is of the opinion that adequate rWrqe,Cclon by oth Amerindian Organisations have been made re.

Iao{ hd use' mini,'rg and sllbcrfsCe rights in Amerindian Communities.

We do bope for positive r€sults e,b€n the time for ad&essing these issres would have manued.
Ecttth,P-regremmer in&ctionsb csccr a Becanse Amer-rndian communities are moutly tocated in the !,firoertand ar€as, some being more isolated thao others,'it is difficuh O monitr and evalufe medical situations.
IIIV/AIDS are primary fdalana" TB, STD'q asrtc rrspiratry causes of,concern forthe Amerindian po uion For other diseases additioaallpgoursesrin,rFnflIxlwtr, quiprned and supplies will help pfqratenoc ig frigft, ItfiFdioal drtposts,teed freezers to make control these disesses wh redd€n6, pattiqularty children more immui-ization and racrinuion of hiug,lad for DPt, M!v!R and other infectious rnanageable.

FrBezer-s ar-s USFd frr *oriry,:$ums diseases which need cold sttrage.
Health post$ need top.to be $pgrtCc to ftcilitua X"-rrys, labwfory and screedng rarccinatiotr, blood and equipment to p:rovide t soddag inoodical genrices bave to travel to urine tests and clrest xflys- Georgetown, I v€ry expenqiVe qderfiikiry Training ,of resource p€rsotrs'srci as mrtrcl, nr,siry aids, msdex, D€atal technicians, CLtWg medical'techniciansd'docttrs vill be imporUm for improvirg these senrices.
iWs'in&girrc ofimrrqlni-rtioq Mining Mining causes distutrtanc€s to th envimmcm, urh€re Amerindians live it causes noise nuisanca, poltution of dorcstic urder gqracss land degadafion, affects river navigntion" flooding'because the nmml wSCf u'uuld htve been blockd and death to aqucic life, This ncods to be addressed and which the Am€rindians depeod on for c@ remedied.

ftdn.
ftdn.

Banking $erviccc: { NADF indicatod at the consrttrtioa thg one of tb Banks op€rating in Guyan4 limited withdrawals for Amerindians to 1,000,0(X) GD (o'ne million, Gryana dollars) after this investigating found this to be umrp and basdeE$; we the,re, oro withdnw presentation and offer an apology.

,'# t. .,.

'I ,i !

I i., 'li ::i i : lli' j : i.

..,.

]\f\ fl,| r l l\ 4t _-,v.

L '{c. I i' "r ..1 .

EERTIFIED ;,* - .


r 'it n t,, Manied at ,4e1a;r* d' rrL .Disrict aforesaiS, after I by na /, /*4"1< (o-rlSupcrintcndent RegirJrar) t This Marriaga was solemtrw.ed ar perforured betWpeq us I eqfu4l,f, , {losqh J ({nt4't*\inlrhe presen.. of '* l G- "Af- Exarnined with the original iiegisttr'by:drc and to ba corr€ct.

G.R.O.Jo.

6.

C.C.PI & 3; lt93/01.

J .

i .. : er Superintendcnt lLegi*ttarJ /W ird- l- t' g\, {lrr,l ; ' 'f " NATIONAL OF TITE EI LYOF,T; ,, t,,.

; ;ri i;iir:.
; ;ri i;iir:.

*,1 , ,ii.

,i:ilii:;i.''

lil ;i ,..,,irilijl SPECIAL SELECT CO ON RESOLUTION NO.

122003 PRESENTED TO THE NATI BY TI{E CHAIRMAN OF TI{E,CO ';',,,ffi"#* I lii;ri i,a,r.,r I .

t:!

:?ts#H,,1$trF.1{fi4W.tifriht$Mtlf'i1ff.4$uff, ll t, :, 2.2 Constitntion of the Special Select Committee: 2.2."1.

The Commitbe of Selection met on 5e Iune, 2003, and nominated nine (9) Members to constitute the Special Select Committee as follows: Membeqs to4, the People's Progressive Party/Civic (5): The Hon.
Ronald Gajtai, M.P.

- Chainnan Minister of Home Affairs The Hon Dr. Ramnauth Bisnauth, Ivnp.

MinisEr of Labour, HumanServices and Social Security Mrs. Indranie Chandarpal, M.P.

Mro.

shirley Edwards, M.P., and h/tr.

Zutfll€r Mustapha, lvlP.

Members from the People's Natio.nal C,gngfess/Reforul (3I- lvft.

Deryck Bernard M.P.

Ms. Arnna Ally, M.P., and Dr. George Norton, M.P.

Member frgm the RisgOrganise and Rebuild P-arhr LL) - Mr. Ravindra Dev, M.P.
Lg 2.3.1' Comtnencement ef (srarniftee's work: The Special Select Commitbe on the Review of Public Holidays held ib first meeting on 2od December, 2003 and met on 14 occasions during the months January,20&t to Apn[ 2004 as follows: I I I ' I il : ${4\!:arr!lJv$in[&t]il+:a{iji;il\u!rjnk!i.,|,,4\a,,.
ri., 4.L0 National Amerindian foundation (NADF) Environmental Educational Development Negative on Stl'May Supporbd 26ft May Proposed 10n Sephmber as a public holiday o 4.10.1 NADF advocated that 26m May must remain and be classified a National Holiday instead of a public holiday as "National" transcends "Public".

4.\0.2 The NADF did not propose sth May being declared a national or public hotlday in recogr-rition of the East Indians arrival here.

Regardless of their numerical .


strengtlj each group has contribuH to the development of Guyana.

4.10.3 It proposed that 10tt September be recognized as a pubtic holiday in recognition'of the Indigmous Peoples and their contribution towards the development and preserwation of Guyana.

This proposal was being justified on the grounds that - ,1. ,: i l:;r-' it ijii.

i:r .

".i ;'fl ij i;i li' ;3rl ,-J .6; + '+ #: '{l '!,i l ,l' I I ;- ,xtr $i n :i 't -ri .i.
(a) (b) (c) r f)L 4.:!i., ,l ' ..," .,,..;.4.,r.

?...r .^!?.

q,r!

Indians as d whole already have four holidays; Amerindians ae a group did nothave any identifiable holiday; Amerindians had occupied Guyana from time immemorial.

: 1:: ",r;;;Iifffiffiffitffii3ffi*,.i.'.

: Supported 5s May Supported 26tl May 4.11.7 rn advociting Sft May to be declared a public holiday in commemoration of Indian arrival in Guyana, GIFI saw the day as one of the most significant moments in the history of Guyana.
4.11,.2 The arrival of Indians inevocably altered the landscaPe - both human and physical.

Providing the day as a holiday together with the month of May as Indian Heritage Month would be an opportunity for the Guyanese Indian community to reflect on its history and to continue unabashedly and unapologetically to stake its claim for equaliity and respect in the national life, and for all Guyanese to recognise the centrality of their presence in the Guyanese reality.
4,72 Guyanese Or-ganisation of ftrdigenous Peoples (GOIP) Negative on Sfi May Negative on 26s May Proposed l0tl Sephmber to be a pubic holiday 4.12.1 Guyanese Organisation of hrdigenous Peoples requested that 10th September be dedared a public holiday which it had been advocating for over a decade.

It was not in favour of Stt May,Indian Atri\ral Day, as a holiday.
It further suggesbd that to overcome Guyana harirg too many holidays, 26e May, which it saw as a holiday, be deleted from the calendar of holidays.

4.12.2 No further additions of holidays must be made once the decision on those of 10dl'September and 5m May was made.

4.13 National Front Alliance (NFA) Negative on 5*, May Did not comment on 26ft Mav 16 HrGIrtIqI{TF OF OR$!
P:tt-EpEN'rAfl 9Nt The Commit@ found these presentations to be useful in thaf they 5.1 allowed for a betbr perspective and understanding of each organisationls proposal that was 'not brought out in the writ err submission The following were the more coqtpglllrrg views exPlessed - 5.2 National e-oinaiulr Foundadon (NADF) Environmental Education Development The representadves of the National Amerindian Environ:nental Education 5.2.1 Derrelopment Foundation in ttrcir opening resrarla stabd that'"When the NADF made tlre proposal to fte HoHday Revie'ru Committee, it did all in its power to make contact Wittr all the Anerindian organisations in tlrc counky, because fhe NADF, although it is operating rurder that name, the document entails the representative organisations and those people thatweworkwitlu Asrerindiarrs are Amerindians whether they belong to TAAI\4OG or the Guyana Organisation of Indigenous Peoples or the Amerindian Peoples Association regardless of political parties or whatever.
Asrerindians are Anerindians and this documentcovers all the Anerindians in this county."

li i I fire representatives refurred to the CARICOM CharEr of Civil.

Society, S.LZ ArHdeb 11 and 26 rcgarding the Rights of Indigenous Peoples to the development process that undertook to continue to protect their historical righb and respect the cultutes and way of life of these peoples.
The representative opined that the CharEr paved the way for the recognition of Amerindiaru in the Commonwealth, and in Guyana since there was a Corctitutional Commission - it can pave the way for Guyana to be the firstcountry in CARICOM to have a holiday for Amerindians.

5.2'3 Wht.rr questioned about the significance of 10d' September, the representatives rt:spendgd, "that September 10th was when Mr. Stephen Campbell, an Amerindian, first cntered Parliament as a Legisrator inr9sr."
5'2'4 The representatives entreatecl the Committee to look closely at the CARICOM Charter of Civil society and consider Articles 11, and26.

s.2.5 In rcsponse to an observation that there was already a month that had been identified as Amerindian Heritage Month, the representatives observed that fhere was no law which gave Amerindians, a month to celebrate and reflect.
They stated that the Amerindian.s were) never torn away from their lands agairut their will and brought here nor did they' colne here on agreemenb to stay and a certain time to leave- They were here.

They did not need a month to reflect 5.2.6 Thc representatives referred to the four holidavs that already existed which are considered Indian holidays.
5.2-7 Members of the Commitbee clarified the statement by pointing out that in the case of Islam there were people of different ethnicities that were members of the Muslim community.

5.2.8 Tobago sizeable The point was made that only Guyana, Suriname and Trinidad and designateri holiday to East Indians since those were the only countries with a amount of East Iridians.
5.2.9 The issues that have emerged are: (a) (b) The representatives who are claiming to speak on behalf of all Amerindftlns iue of the view that they do not need a month to reflect since they were always here; They would like to have 10rh september be a public holiday.

20 ..* lt !4{d iid .r'i]'.

:lj iirr,.

,:r., llrrii , "lr+ 5.3 NADF advocated that 26tt May must remain and be dassified.

a National Holiday instead of a public holiday as "l\lational" transcends '?ubliC.
NADF is not in favour of slh May being declared a National or Public Holiday.

The positions of the NADF as stated in (a) and (b) are clearly not witlrin orr mandate, however, considering the reasons and rationale for 10th September the Co'nmiftee may wish to include rhis as a proposal for the National Assembly to consider.
5.3.1 This Association claimed that it had submitbd in the past, several letters to the Chairman of the National Holiday Committee calling for 12s October, Holocaust Day, be declared a. public holiday.

5.3.2 He said that no riesPonse was received and he saw it discriminatory for the call for a holiday for.an Indian Arrival Day to be treated with such alacrity.

The Chairman indicated that he was unaware of such letbrs and requested a copy.
5-3.3 The representative reporbd that Holocaust Day was already being observed at a ceremony hetd annually at the sea wall.

He pointed out that they were in the process of erecting a monument to the African Holocaust and that that day should be on the calendar of events.

5.3.4 A check of the CARICOM member states revealed that no other states observed 12tt October as a national or public holiday.
6,2 Observations 4 +--!-.|-- tr $ome of the proposals which c.rme from the respondents fell outside of 6.2.7 the mandate.

The Committee, nonetheless, believes that they are irnporhmt for the healing and unification of all our peoples.

It is important that we demonstrate that equity is seen to be dispensed equally within ttre principte of unity in diversity.
6.2.2 The Committee noted the r,eto sum premise of many of the presentations that evince a beHef that the acknowledgement of the daims of one group wou.ld somehow take away from the daims of other groups.

The Comrnittee is of the vlew that this ought not to be so.

6.3 .i &.f 6.3.1" 6.3.2 reFnrnins&af.

"thsBFlli+'Iil9li4eyg..$$,as,fheN.af inalrHolidays{#cd 6.3.3 4,P,nstdes ,d o the xemoval of Boxing Day as a National Holiday; the indusion of 1.2e october as a National Holid.ay designated .
"African HolocaustDat''; f,sE NF,tl Holiday-fo*mes+{lqnff $ after consultation with the Musrim comnunity whether to replace Yaou-mun Nabi urith Eid'ul-Fitr as a National Holiday; o the principle that whenever a holiday falls on a Srrnday it should be observed or celebrated on that day, lrdth the exception of Easter Monday, and not on the following day.

6.4 RECOMMENDATIONS (i) Re: ,26th Ma,y Rationale o All countries of CARICOM observe their Independence Day.

.
.

Independence was not handed on a platter it was fought for by the people of Guyana.

o Apart from political, economic and other consideratioru 26ft May signifies the day when the Union Jack was replaced by the Golden Anowhead, and "British Guiana" became "Gtryana" thereby signifying the attainment of sovereignty by the Guyanese nation.
Recommendation : The CommitEe, therefore, necommends that - - Inilqmdence Dny, that is to saA, tlp 26th May, or, if tlnt itoy is a Stmd.ay, tlu follouting ilay, be incfuiled ht t tc Public Hohilnys Act, Chapts 79:07 as a pu,bhc hotiilay.

Caveat - The Committee is cognisant of the recommendatior!

herein made in accordance with our mandate, appears to nrn counter to its proposal with respect to holidays falling on Sundays.
that fact the (ii) Re: Sth May Rationale The proposals and counter proposals supporting 5e May must be seen in the context of Guyana'e realities.

Having regards, therefore, thah- .

the call to designate sth May as a Nationar Horiday was made over 40 yeare ago with increased support over rin'e; o Indiane constitute the majority of the population of Guyana; .
they have made significant contribution development of Guyana; towards the o while there were different assessments as to the nature of or laeaning of Indian Arival all respondents accepted its landmark status a$ a semitrar event that had permanent coruequences for all Guyana $.ecommen4a{o+r The Committee, therefore, recommends that - - 'ltriaal D!U, fl_ut .is tg tqy, tltc ffh Moy, or, if that day is a $1yday, tlrc forlouring_ pu,, ut incluiteil ln ine pubWc Holidals Act, Chaptet 79:07 as a public fuoliday.
Caveat while the aforesaid recommendation is in keeping with our mandate the committee wishes to note that all the su6miisions fa"ourint s" May as a Public Holiday reconmended thatit be designakd,,Inlian Arrival Dat''as is the cise in Trinidad and Tobago.

7.0 coNcLUSTON 7.1.

Ttre Committee is of the view that the recommended changes will not necessarily increase the number of holidays being celebrated annually in Guyana.
7.2 There is a distinct possibility that the nurnber of working days being celebrated as National Holidays may very well be reduced.

7'3 The feeling of Members is that they have been honoured by the opporhrnity to serve on this CommitEe.

7.4 The Committee's work could not have been effectively and efficiently concluded without the participation of the public - both organizadons and individuals - by way of writbn submissions and oral presentations.

The Commit6e wishc to expreos thanks to theur.


7.5 The staff of parliament Office contribuH immeasurably to the work of the commithe.

The commitbe wourd rike to thank them too.

I 7.6 It is hoped that the recommendations of the Committee find favour with Members of the National Assembly.

36 8.0 Report of the Select Committee 8.1 At ib meeting on 156 Aptrl, 20&l the Special Select Committee on the Review of Public Holidays agreed that its Report should be presented to the National Assembly.
8.1.1 adoption 9.0 g.7 The Report is accordingly hereby submitted to the National Assembly for Mingtes.

SubmissioTrs aqd Verbatim F.ecords I The Minubs, Submissions and Verbatim Records of the proceedings of the meetings of the Committee have been prepared and can be seen at the Parliament Office.

Confinncil this 21d ilay of April, 20M.

/1 fr"^*/) {q*il rte kon I. Rontk G$rai,IYLP.

Cluinnan Committees Division Parliament Office Public Buildings Georgetown.

21"t Aprit, ?

:AM.