Chief Co-operatives Development Officer seems to be going on a mere claim by a discredited lot

With respect to the Chief Co-operatives Development Officer’s (CCDO) assertion that he has been advised (by the deposed Committee of Management members) that the membership of the Guyana Public Service Co-operative Credit Union (GPSCCU) Limited stands at 25,385, I am convinced that he was not provided with documentation to that effect. What the CCDO seems to be going on is a mere claim by a discredited lot who refuse to accept that the general membership of the GPSCCU has shown them the door by a resounding vote of “no confidence” in their ability to serve the general membership outside of their proven quest for self-enrichment and self-aggrandizement.

Let me clear up that major attempt to mislead by the former Committee of Management (CoM) by highlighting the fact that the membership figures that they have conveniently trotted out refer to the Auditor’s Report for the year ended December 31, 2021. With regard to Membership, it stated Membership as at January 1 – 23,033; Admissions during the year – 2,873; Dismissals, resignations, and deaths during the year – (368). Membership as at December 31, 2021 – 25,538. Editor, we have gone past 2021 by two years and to expect that those figures would not have been negatively impacted by several factors including COVID-19 is a bit of a stretch.

Editor, there is a universally accepted principle that “a party who alleges a fact has the burden of proving it.” What this simple statement conveys is that a mere allegation will never suffice since it remains a mere allegation which is not considered as evidence unless and until they who allege have discharged their obligation of proving. Therefore, it is for the complainants to produce the mandatory Register of Members (RoM) as at February 29, 2024, to prove their claim.

Editor, for ease of reference permit me to share Section 12 of the Cooperative Societies Act of the Laws of Guyana Chapter 88:01 which explicitly states inter alia that “Every registered society shall keep a copy of this Act … and a list of its members open to inspection, free of charge, at all reasonable times at the registered address of the society.” Regulation 6 inter alia states “Every registered society shall keep a register (to be called “the Register of Members”) in which there shall be entered (a) the name, address and occupation of each member and a statement of the shares, if any, held by him; (b) the date on which each member’s name was entered in the register; (c) the date on which any member ceased to be a member; …and (d) the nominee, if any, appointed under regulation 9.” GPSCCU Rule 20 states that “The Society shall keep a register of its members in accordance with the provisions of Regulation 6.” The former committee members have been quoting chapter and verse of 88:01 but seem to have conveniently forgotten their legal obligations under the law.

Three members of the former CoM were appointed by the Court to give effect to a 2022 petition by over two thousand members for a Special General Meeting (SGM). The reason for that order stemmed from the consistent refusal of the then majority of nine to acknowledge or even seek to assuage the genuine concerns of the vast majority of the credit union’s public servant members. This state of affairs was further aggravated by downright non-cooperation and non-compliance of the nine to give effect to the Judge’s orders with respect to the conduct of the SGM.

However, in spite of no less than nine requests by the court-appointed SGM committee for a copy of the RoM, none was provided. The first excuse was that the software provider could not facilitate our request since they were having difficulty configuring the software to accommodate what is essentially a legal requirement. We requested a meeting with the software provider to explain our need; this was not facilitated, and we were accused of not being trusting. Eventually we were met with an outright refusal and rudely told not to request the RoM again.

Editor the antics and shenanigans by the majority of the ousted CoM, are designed to distract us from their true agenda, which is to remain in place for as long as they can receive support from quarters that are expected, nay required to be neutral, regardless of the disrepute the good name of the credit union is being dragged.

Is there something to cover up? Reports of members being called in an effort to prevent their participation at the SGM further justify such a question and brings into stark focus the immediate clamour about lack of quorum. As I write this, members are being called up and offered loans if they stop supporting the duly elected CoM. A few have had their loan applications threatened with disapprovals.

Stabroek News of March 18, 2024 captioned “Public service credit union vice chair says has provided list of names required by co-op chief.” reported that “he

(Mentore) has provided the list of names of those who attended the Special General Meeting as well as a list of those who voted.” I never made such a claim! I called the reporter Antonio Dey and expressed my concern that he had misrepresented our conversation, to which he responded vaguely that the report had to be placed in context because not everyone reads the newspapers, or are aware of the issues. Unless Stabroek News can provide evidence that I said as was reported in their news article, I hereby seek an unreserved apology and retraction of the offending parts of the said news item. As was expected, the gang went to town on that piece of misinformation. Furthermore, the CCDO went on a rant in a letter to the editor of the Stabroek Newspapers of March 19, 2024, headed “Mentore did not present the information that I requested” and accusing me of claiming “that a list of names of those who attended the Special General Meeting, as well as those who voted, was provided to the Chief Cooperatives Development Officer is far from the truth. In fact, it is a blatant lie, which he ought to retract. I hereby call on the CCDO to issue a public apology to me for sullying my character with his unsubstantiated allegations. I also observed that Demerara Waves of March 19, 2024, apart from its provocative headline, gave a relatively accurate account of our exchange.

Editor, I have noted the apparent disinclination of the CCDO to sanction or to even acknowledge the glaring omission by the former CoM and the GPSCCU for their dereliction and breach of the law as it relates to maintenance of the RoM, and the March 4, 2024, disreputable and reprehensible behaviour of the former members in full public view both locally and internationally, is instructive. The combative stance of that worthy may be puzzling to the uninformed, but not wholly unexpected from where I stand.

Yours!

Patrick E. Mentore

Vice-Chair, Committee of Management GPSCCU Ltd