Hughes, Wade say ‘weak’ murder charge slapped on MV Barima captain, others; Opposition Leader offers to salvage vessel

Last Updated on Tuesday, 28 July 2026, 16:35 by Denis Chabrol

Prominent lawyer Nigel Hughes on Tuesday said the charging of the captain of the MV Barima and other persons with 77 counts of murder is without any proof of intent, and questioned whether the real motive is to effectivel block them from testifying before a Commision of Inquiry.

“Could it be that the real intention here is, the accused having being charged with murder, would not be able to testify before the COI as any testimony at the COI can be used against them at the criminal trial. Hence they will remain silent,” he said in a Facebook post.

Meanwhile, Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed said on his Team Mohamed’s Facebook page that he was willing to salvage the vessel which French military divers said would be almost impossible to do. He stressed the need to uncover all of the evidence from the MV Barima which is on the seabed about 10 miles off Devonshire Castle, Essequibo Coast. “Give me permission to float the MV Barima. If the government has nothing to hide, then let us bring up the MV Barima,” he said.

Mr Hughes, a former leader of the Alliance For Change (AFC), said the murder charges against Kevin Price, called “KP”, a 40-year-old Captain of Melanie Damishana, East Coast Demerara; Rondell Dwayne Roberts, a 42-year-old Chief Mate of Grove Public Road, East Bank Demerara and Delon Granderson, a 33-year-old Goods Superintendent of Fellowship, West Coast Demerara was a “most perverse attempt at distraction.”

He reasoned that a harge of murder requires that the accused had the intention to kill his victim. “In the circumstances of this charge it would mean that the accused when they set sail, had the intention to kill or cause grievious bodily harm to all the persons on board or developed this intention at some stage after setting sail,” he said.

He said perhaps Guyabese have the unique ability to compound what is a tragedy of epic proportions into additional manifest injustice by the institution of murder charges thereby silencing key witnesses before the COI.

Another lawyer, Darren Wade also believed that the murder charge against Price, Roberts and Granderson would be dismissed because the prosecutjon would be unable to prove prior malice. “The requirement of malice aforethought is what distinguishes murder from other forms of unlawful homicide,” said Mr Wade, an outspoken member of the opposition People’s National Congress Reform. “Make no mistake: these murder charges are legally nonsensical. They are an insult to the criminal law, an affront to justice, and a disservice to the families who deserve genuine accountability,” he also said.

On the issue of whether a charge of manslaughter would have been appropriate, Mr Wade said if the evidence supports manslaughter or criminal negligence, liability would not necessarily have been limited to the Captain and crew. “It could also have extended to senior Government officials, public officers, regulators, executives and others whose acts or omissions may have materially contributed to this tragedy,” he added.

He queried whether the institution of murder charges was aimed at shielding senior officials from closer scrutiny by focusing public attention almost exclusively on the Captain and crew.

Against the background of concerns about limited attention systemic negligence, regulatory failures and the potential criminal and civil liability of those responsible for the management, maintenance, inspection and continued operation of the ferry,  Mr Wade said he also had reservations about the composition of the Commission of Inquiry. He said ge public is entitled to a Commission that is independent, impartial and capable of examining every level of responsibility without fear or favour. Questions that deserve answers, he said, include who made the decisions, who ignored the warnings, who permitted the vessel to continue operating, and whether those persons should also be held accountable under the civil and criminal law.