Dear Editor,
I write with concern regarding the recent round‑table discussion on anti‑corruption convened by Ms. Gail Teixeira, MP and Minister of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance on Tuesday, November 11, 2025. While the event may have had the appearance of engagement, the underlying sense is that it served more as a farce than a meaningful forum for accountability.
Is Ms. Texieria to believe that Guyanese are oblivious that corruption does not exist?’ We will recall since 2020, when Bharrat Jagdeo assumed office as Vice President of the Cooperative Republic of Guyana, persistent allegations of corrupt dealings continue to shadow his administration. A prominent instance arises from the undercover investigation by VICE News in February 2022, in which Chinese businessman Su Zhi Rong claimed to act as a middleman brokering investment deals in which Mr Jagdeo’s name was invoked. The report recorded Su purporting that bribes would have to be paid, and that Mr Jagdeo’s “hands are very clean” only when challenged. Though Mr Jagdeo has strongly denied any bribe‑taking, and VICE concluded they could not link him to actual corruption, the allegations themselves remain unresolved and signal a disconcerting opacity.
Moreover, while specifics of additional deals (for instance, a fuel‑deal involving a Director of GuyOil Board, Mr Akanni Blair, and engagements involving Susan Rodrigues and staffers at the Central Housing and Planning Authority) may exist in public discourse, I have been unable to locate credible, fully substantiated reporting that documents them in sufficient detail for legislative or prosecutorial follow‑up. I therefore urge the media and civil society to pursue further transparent investigation into these allegations.
In contrast to this current state of affairs, the Coalition Government, from 2015–2020, instituted a number of anti‑corruption mechanisms that, while imperfect, represented a meaningful attempt to reduce graft and recover state assets. For example, the establishment of the State Assets Recovery Agency (SARA) in 2017 was intended to trace and recover unlawfully acquired state property. The Coalition publicly asserted that large sums, between GYD 28 billion and GYD 35 billion per year were being lost to procurement fraud and illicit capital flights in the preceding years. While the execution of SARA’s mandate fell short of expectations, at least the institutional architecture for asset recovery existed.
By contrast, once the PPP/C administration returned to office in August 2020, it moved swiftly to dismantle SARA. In October 2020 the Government terminated the agency’s staff, sent home 42 employees and signalled the closing of the unit. By October of that year the agency was formally disbanded. If the PPP/C were serious about combating corruption, they would not have abandoned an entire asset‑recovery unit; this decision suggests a retreat from accountability rather than a reinforcement of it.
Today, corruption remains prevalent across the public sector of Guyana and taxpayers’ monies are being siphoned off with minimal visible recourse. The ongoing talk of “anti‑corruption round‑tables” must be distinguished from tangible enforcement, transparency, and measurable recovery of mis‑allocated public resources. Until the former is meaningfully linked to the latter, the public discourse remains hollow.
In conclusion, I respectfully submit that the round‑table convened by Ms Teixeira suffers from a credibility deficit. We must insist on substantive mechanisms, such as: full independent investigations into alleged deals involving senior public figures, full disclosure of procurement and contract awards (especially in the oil & gas sector), the reinstitution or redesign of an asset‑recovery agency with full independence, and regular public reporting of recovered state assets and funds. Without these, the design of the forum becomes a performance rather than a process of accountability.
Yours truly,
Annette Ferguson
