Dear Conservation International Guyana,I write in my capacity as a technical advisor and community advocate to formally lodge a safeguard grievance concerning the governance transition and proposed tourism co-management arrangements for the Imbotero Research Centre. This grievance is submitted to activate Conservation International’s safeguard review mechanism and ensure compliance with Indigenous rights standards, Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) principles, and the Amerindian Act. The Imbotero Research Centre project, implemented by the Guyana Marine Conservation Society, is scheduled to conclude in July. Based on discussions with the Toshao and Village Council of Imbotero, the original intention of the project was to build community capacity to assume management of the facility as an alternative livelihood. However, I have been informed that Wilderness Explorers has been approached to assume management of the tourism component of the facility. The Toshao indicated that he has not been made aware of any change to the initial understanding, nor formally consulted regarding private company involvement. He further noted that Wilderness Explorers last engaged the community approximately two years ago to conduct a tourism assessment, at which time no discussions were held regarding management takeover. At present, the facility manager, a resident of the village, has resigned, the deputy manager is expected to leave in April, the project is nearing closure, and there remains no written Terms of Reference or formal co-management agreement between the Research Centre and the community outlining management authority, revenue sharing, community benefits, liability, environmental safeguards, or dispute resolution procedures. This creates a governance vacuum during a sensitive transition period.There is serious concern that the accelerated process now underway, including rushed workshops to draft governance structures, establish a tourism committee, develop codes of conduct, onboard representatives, and sign co-management arrangements, may not meet internationally recognised FPIC standards. Given the community’s limited literacy capacity, limited prior disclosure regarding external management transfer, insufficient time for independent legal or technical review, and the compressed timeline linked to project closure, there is significant risk that consent may not be fully informed, freely given, or deliberated internally. Furthermore, the facility operates in proximity to the Shell Beach Protected Area and the Barima Mora passage, requiring clear governance arrangements addressing use rights, tourism carrying capacity, safety protocols, environmental liability, and regulatory compliance. Without a properly structured and independently reviewed agreement, both conservation outcomes and community rights may be compromised.In light of these concerns, I respectfully request that Conservation International formally activate its safeguard review mechanism; pause any agreement signing or governance finalisation pending review; conduct independent verification of FPIC compliance; disclose any agreements or MOUs relating to management transfer to the Village Council; and facilitate a structured, adequately resourced consultation process to ensure meaningful community participation. This grievance is not intended to obstruct conservation objectives, but to ensure that Indigenous land rights are protected, governance transitions are legally sound, co-management structures are equitable, and Conservation International’s safeguard commitments are upheld.