Concerns have been raised regarding the financial terms and alleged impropriety surrounding Saint Lucia’s cruise port agreement with Global Ports Holding. Financial crime blogger Kenneth Rijock has brought forward claims of bribery, specifically a purported US$3.5 million payment, and questioned the fairness of the deal for the nation.
Allegations of Bribery and Improper Payments
In a September 7 article, Rijock detailed allegations from a source within Saint Lucia suggesting that Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Tourism, Dr. Ernest Hilaire, may have accepted a US$3.5 million bribe. This alleged payment was reportedly made by a senior executive of UK-based Global Ports Holding as the company sought to gain control of Saint Lucia’s ports for development and enhancement. Rijock contends that such a payment, if proven, would contravene Saint Lucia’s Integrity in Public Life Act.
Further allegations emerged in a separate Letter to the Editor published on Medium. This letter specifically linked the US$3.5 million payment to the Global Ports Holding agreement. It identified Dr. Sean Matthew, described as a representative of Global Ports Holding, as the individual who allegedly made the payment to Dr. Hilaire to secure the cruise port contract. The same Medium letter also referenced Global Ports Holding’s operations in Antigua and Barbuda, where the company holds another long-term cruise port agreement. It further alleged that Matthew had previously offered US$5 million in relation to a proposal made to the Government of St. Kitts and Nevis, which that government reportedly rejected, opting to maintain state control over its ports.
Details of the Cruise Port Agreement
Global Ports Holding officially announced the finalization of the Saint Lucia Cruise Port concession on August 9, 2023. The agreement is set for an initial term of 30 years, with an option for a 10-year extension, potentially allowing the operating arrangement to extend to 40 years. The company officially began its operations at the Saint Lucia Cruise Port on May 1, 2024, and has since started collecting revenue from port fees.
Questions Over Revenue Distribution
A significant point of contention highlighted by Rijock concerns the division of revenue generated from cruise passengers. According to Rijock’s claims, Global Ports Holding collects approximately US$10 per cruise passenger. In contrast, the Saint Lucia government, through the Saint Lucia Air and Sea Ports Authority (SLASPA), reportedly receives around US$1 per passenger. Based on an estimated annual figure of 700,000 cruise passengers, Rijock calculated that Global Ports Holding could accrue roughly US$6.3 million annually, while SLASPA would receive approximately US$700,000. This suggests that about US$7 million in annual passenger-related revenue could fall under the private operator’s control.
Extrapolating this figure over the potential 40-year term of the agreement (US$7 million multiplied by 40 years) results in a total of US$280 million. However, it is important to note that directly labeling this entire sum as a “loss” for Saint Lucia would require more comprehensive financial analysis. Such a calculation does not inherently account for the operator’s investment obligations, any debts assumed under the agreement, construction costs, operating expenditures, fluctuations in passenger numbers, or other financial provisions stipulated within the concession agreement.
Transparency and Legal Scrutiny
Rijock has emphasized that the precise structure of passenger fees and the broader financial arrangements of the deal need greater public clarity. In a September 8 article, he raised questions about the potential for the agreement to be challenged, either through parliamentary action or legal proceedings. He characterized the deal as heavily favoring the private operator and suggested that aspects of the agreement might be contestable on grounds of enforceability, illegality, or being ultra vires—meaning actions taken beyond the scope of legal authority.
Both Rijock’s September 8 article and the Medium letter also pointed out that despite Global Ports Holding assuming operations and collecting fees, expansion work at the ports reportedly had not commenced, even after approximately two years since the company took control. Rijock expressed his anticipation of further developments, stating, “Will this contract, said by many to be unconscionable, and a gross insult to the citizens of Saint Lucia, be set aside, either by a court of competent jurisdiction, or the country’s Parliament? We shall see, as more facts emerge that appear to make it either unenforceable, illegal, or even Ultra Vires; We will be watching.” He concluded by calling for accountability from the Saint Lucian government, particularly from Minister Dr. Ernest Hilaire, asserting that the citizens of the island have a right to be fully informed about the details of the agreement.
Conclusion
The allegations brought forth by Kenneth Rijock and detailed in the Letter to the Editor raise significant questions about the Saint Lucia cruise port deal. The claims of bribery, the financial structure of the revenue sharing, and the pace of development warrant further investigation and public disclosure to ensure transparency and accountability in the management of national assets.
