REVISTING BURNHAM’S CODE OF CONDUCT

Guyana is a small society. In such societies it is always difficult to avoid certain relationships, including conflicts of interest.

When you live in a small society, it is more likely that you will have to ask someone to do something for you and that person may either then or in the future have some professional relationship with you or the entity you represent.

There are cases where the resource base is at times so limited that you are forced to call on certain persons to do work for you and this could place you in a conflict of interest if you are also in a position whereby you have to decide whether those who do work for you also have to do work for the company that you represent.

Many times it is hard to avoid this because the required skills may simply be limited to a small number of persons, restricting your choices.

A number of government officials have built large structures, some for business and some as their homes. And in a number of cases, it has been said that persons who tender for public contracts undertook private work for some government officials.  For example, there have been reports that major contractors in Guyana were hired to construct the homes and business places of some government officials. This clearly raises serious questions about conflicts of interest and it is time that the government outline policies which their top officials should follow so as to avoid the perception of them benefitting personally from those who undertake public works.

In the 1970’s when corruption intensified under the Forbes Burnham administration, there were key persons who resigned from the party because they were deeply concerned about the unchecked corruption. Declassified documents have since revealed that Burnham himself was receiving kickbacks from an American company operating in Guyana.

It is not clear however whether this money was used for his party or for himself but other declassified documents did confirm that he had asked for and was granted support from the Central Intelligence Agency for his party.

As the charges of corruption increased, the idea of a Code of Conduct for the Ministers of the government was proposed. This seemed to be a good plan but it turned out to be a public relations gimmick on the part of Burnham because no code of conduct was ever implemented.

The PPP is now facing widespread perception of massive corruption concerning its membership. The PPP needs to address these perceptions especially in the context of reports that major contractors- companies that enjoy multimillion dollar contracts- who undertake public works have been involved in building of homes and business for government officials.

This is something that should be avoided because apart from the perceptions that it will create, there is the possibility of a major conflict of interest if at any time a government official is required to approve a contract for a contractor that undertook works at the official’s home or business.

In other jurisdictions, reports of possible conflicts of interest of this sort would have been handed over to the Integrity Commission for investigation. However, in Guyana the legislation that provides for integrity legislation is weak and in any event the Integrity Commission has no Chairman and is not recognized by the opposition because of this fact.

The government, however, should take the lead and establish for itself a code of conduct indicating how top government functionaries with businesses interests should deal with those interests when they sit in positions of authority within the government.

The government should also establish rules to deter government officials from having major contractors undertake construction work at the homes and businesses of these officials.

The government should require its ministers and other senior officials to not invest in any sector of the economy so long as they hold public office. They should invest directly and they should not invest through front men.

Burnham’s Code of Conduct was never implemented. The PPPC should not make the same mistake.