The Health Ministry said on Thursday it will vigorously defend its position before an arbitral tribunal should VAMED Engineering GmbH commence arbitration proceedings, categorically rejecting what it called a misleading narrative from the Austrian-based contractor over two hospital projects in Guyana.
The ministry gave the undertaking in a statement in response to a press release issued by VAMED regarding the Guyana Paediatric and Maternal Hospital and the New Amsterdam Hospital Campus. According to the government, the contractor’s account omits critical facts regarding its performance under the contracts and the reasons behind actions taken by the Ministry of Health.
The government noted that it has remained fully committed to completing both hospitals, which it described as strategically important, and that it acted in good faith throughout, honouring its contractual obligations while repeatedly engaging VAMED over delays, performance deficiencies and non-compliance flagged by the projects’ supervising engineers.
Contrary to VAMED’s assertions, the government maintained that the dispute cannot be reduced to a question of payments alone, noting that the contracts impose reciprocal obligations, with payments tied to measured, approved works and the procurement of materials and equipment. It added that it had documented concerns over missed milestones, inadequate resource mobilisation and the contractor’s inability to maintain the pace required for timely completion, matters that formed the basis of extensive correspondence over many months.
The Ministry of Health explained that it exercised its contractual rights only after giving VAMED numerous opportunities to remedy the deficiencies, noting that Notices of Intention to Terminate were issued in line with contractual provisions and dispute resolution mechanisms.
The ministry also rejected the suggestion that certified payment certificates automatically establish undisputed indebtedness, stating that the amounts cited by VAMED remain subject to contractual valuation, rights of set-off, certification procedures and unresolved contractual issues. It argued that allegations concerning export credit financing similarly failed to account for the link between financing and project performance.
The Ministry of Health noted that it had consistently sought an amicable resolution and had participated in discussions aimed at avoiding termination or arbitration, in the hope the projects would be completed for the benefit of the Guyanese people while safeguarding public funds.
The ministry stressed that it remains confident the full factual record will show its decisions were lawful, justified and made in accordance with the contracts, and reiterated its commitment to delivering modern healthcare infrastructure for the country.
As the matter is now likely to proceed through formal dispute resolution, the ministry said it would be inappropriate to comment further on issues reserved for determination by the arbitral tribunal.
