The MV Barima Commission of Inquiry (COI) faced a difficult task this morning in its efforts to get the Director of Maritime Safety at the Maritime Administration Department (MARAD), Captain Courtney Mc Donald, to offer his independent analysis of two 2025 inspection reports that were completed on the MV Barima. Those reports highlighted a number of safety deficiencies.

For more than two hours, Mc Donald dodged questions from Commissioner Hayden Pritchard, forcing the Chairman of the Commission, Godfrey Smith to reprimand him.

“You are prevaricating. You are obfuscating our work. You are being asked as Director of Maritime Safety to assist us in understanding what this February 2025 report means. How should we interpret it? Does it mean no sail? Does it mean low priority? What does it mean?” the Chairman said, as he scolded Mc Donald while pressing him for answers.

The Commission was at the time examining a number of inspection reports on public ferries in Guyana including the MV Barima. The reports were submitted to the Commission by Mc Donald and MARAD’s Marine Superintendent (ag), Christopher Bailey.

The now sunken vessel was inspected twice in 2025, with both inspections highlighting a number of safety deficiencies.

The last inspection was conducted by Bailey, who on Tuesday told the Commission that the vessel was in “fair condition” despite the safety deficiencies.

That report found that while the MV Barima was under maintenance for generator repairs, it had two engines but only one was working, one of two generators was under maintenance, and there was no emergency generator, no radar system and no serviceable life-rafts.

Additionally, a number key documents were also missing.

Today, Mc Donald relied heavily on that report, telling the Commission that the report was clear, and there was no need for him to weigh in on it.

He testified that the report was sent to the owner of the vessel – the Transport and Harbours Department – and it was for that entity to rectify the deficiencies.

“Now, the report here has what is okay, what is seen on board, what is not seen on board, what is deficient, what is not deficient, then it is concluded with the inspector’s comments. I did not need to make any more comment before I send it to the owner, operators of the vessel. It is clear, the inspector report once it goes to the operators of the vessel, it is clear for them to see what is going on here. I don’t need to write anything more to the owners of the boat. This report is clear to me, and it is so simple, it can be clear to them,” Mc Donald told the Commission.

Mc Donald said based on the established system, when the deficiencies are addressed by Transport and Harbours, MARAD would then be informed to conduct a follow up inspection.

But as he was pressed by Commissioner Pritchard for more answers, the Director of Maritime Safety said there was no reason to send the report to the Director General of MARAD, since there was nothing in the report that indicated that “the vessel was unsatisfactory.”

“In the comments it stated that the vessel was under maintenance. Now, if in the comments I saw that the vessel was operating, then this report would have gone to the Director General but this vessel was not operating at the time of the inspection, hence the reason it did not go to the Director General,” he maintained.

The inspection report did not indicate whether the MV Barima passed the inspection, and Mc Donald, when confronted with that, reverted to the inspector’s report, and maintained that the vessel was alongside the Transport and Harbours Goods Wharf undergoing maintenance and was not in operation.

He said the report did not indicate whether or not the vessel was unsatisfactory, but there was nothing in the report to suggest it was.

“If he sees he inspects a boat and to his opinion it is not satisfactory, he will put unsatisfactory. Not putting that basically means that he is satisfied with what he is seeing,” Mc Donald told the Commission.

He stressed throughout his testimony that it was for Transport and Harbours Department to rectify the deficiencies before the vessel set sail.

 However, the Commissioner drew Mc Donald’s attention to the February 2025 inspection report, which flagged similar deficiencies.

Notwithstanding those deficiencies, many of which were considered by Mc Donald to be high priority, the vessel undertook several voyages during that period.

Commissioner Pritchard submitted that the Transport and Harbours Department should not be responsible for overseeing itself, with regards to corrective measures.

Related posts:

Deficiencies highlighted in 2024 MV Barima Inspection were not rectified for over a year Acting Marine Superintendent testifies no reason existed to ground MV Barima despite deficiencies Rescue Coordination Director tells COI response to MV Barima disaster was “reasonably well done” President establishes Safety and Compliance Audit team to review maritime safety and standards