Dear Editor,

The daughter of a missing MV Barima passenger told the Commission of Inquiry that she has no confidence in the probe. Her words should be treated as a warning for the Commission, not dismissed as one grieving relative’s frustration. Families have been picketing weekly, pressing for the vessel to be refloated and criticising the lack of direct communication from the State and the COI. Her sentiment is evidently shared.

If it goes unaddressed, the consequences for the Commission could be serious. A rigorous report can still be dismissed before it is written, and findings the public has already decided not to believe carry little weight. Families and witnesses who distrust the process may also withhold testimony or boycott it, leaving gaps in the evidence and weakening the very record the Commission needs. Doubts about how the COI was established can harden into a belief that the outcome is predetermined, regardless of how the commissioners actually conduct themselves.

Small grievances can feed that belief. Families have complained that some received $650,000 per missing relative for burial costs while others received only $350,000. Whatever the explanation, an unexplained disparity like this lets people conclude that the process treats families unequally. Once that conclusion forms, it colours how everything else the Commission does is received.

Other inquiries have faced the same danger. After the Grenfell Tower fire, survivors and bereaved families doubted that a single-chair inquiry could understand their experience, and some threatened to boycott it. After a petition drew over 156,000 signatures, the government reversed its earlier refusal and added two panel members.

The question of evidence compounds the problem. Many families see the salvage of the vessel as essential to answers and closure, and if hearings proceed without it, the Commission may be judged on that grievance rather than on its findings. There is also the danger of politicisation, as the COI risks becoming a proxy for wider disputes over government accountability, drowning out the families it was created to serve. Even if it completes its work, recommendations on maritime safety and compensation will be harder to carry out, and easier to challenge, if public trust is low.

These risks can be reduced. The Commission should open a direct and regular line of communication with the families. It should publish its procedures and timelines clearly, and say plainly how evidence, including the wreck, will be preserved and examined. It should also explain any differences in treatment of families before they harden into resentment.

Ninety-odd lives were lost or remain unaccounted for. The families are owed more than an inquiry. They are owed one they can believe in.

Sincerely,
Keith Bernard