Press coverage

Readers Respond

Email

Opinions expressed in Stam-Scandal.com by contributors are not necessarily shared by
the editor and/or publisher/owner.

The Philatelic Exporter has recently acknowledged the mistake it made regarding this matter and the Chad government has also recognised that an injustice hads been done. We now consider this matter closed.

Our original article is shown below.

"Recently the respected magazine, Philatelic Exporter, made a rare mistake and reported the production of a souvenir sheet commemorating the recent Spanish Royal Wedding as an issue by the Republic of Chad. The stamp is going to be, in fact, issued under a contract with the Postal Administration of St. Thomas and Prince and with the full authority of the Royal House of Spain.

The agent responsible for the issue has contracts with both the Republic of Chad and St. Thomas and Prince. The Postal Authority of Chad unfortunately did not bother to check the facts with the agent and immediately issued a directive declaring the stamp illegal. This is, of course, immediately promulgated by the UPU in their circulars and suddenly a stamp issued by St. Thomas and Prince which was intended to be sold to raise money for the victims of the Madrid bombings is delayed because of the confusion that has been generated by the incompetence of the Postal Administration of Chad and the UPU.

The agent has written to all the authorities involved in an attempt to rescue the situation and is waiting for a reply, though he is pessimistic that there is any will amongst those involved to rectify the mistake they have made.

This problem exposes the problems that come from dealing with Postal Administrations which are less than scrupulous in their dealings with the agents that they appoint to produce their stamps.

Money is paid to a Postal Administration to secure a contract to act as agent for that country. Corrupt officials appropriate the funds and subsequent changes in personnel results in the contract being declared void unless a further payment is made.

This is worse than Catch-22 for anyone caught up in the chaos that seems to prevail in these Administrations.

Why should anyone pay for a contract when one official is in office; sit by, powerless, as he appropriates the funds and then suffer the inevitable consequence as his successor declares the contract invalid unless another payment is made?

This whole process continues ad nauseam while the UPU supports these Administrations (see Leavey Lecture) by tamely declaring stamps produced under legitimate contracts illegal at the behest of the Administration committing the fraud.

We will publish more on this story as it unfolds."