AG’s interpretation of CFATF letter

inaccurate – APNU

“Just like how Dr. Luncheon said he (Attorney General Nandlall) doesn’t speak for him, he doesn’t speak for us either, and I don’t respect any interpretation which he gives to this set of facts, because when somebody else looks at the same set of facts it’s entirely different.”
Those were the words of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) Executive Joseph Harmon as he spoke to the Attorney

APNU Executive
Joseph Harmon

General (AG) Anil Nandlall’s interpretation of a letter sent by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) pronouncing on APNU’s amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Bill.
Nandlall was quoted as saying that government sent the Opposition’s draft to CFATF “and as I predicted, the CFATF rejected every single one of the amendments that they are proposing.”
However according to Harmon “his interpretation of a factual situation is erroneous and if the public were to be shown the letter which came from CFATF and he should also make public the letter which was sent to them, we would be able to make a careful interpretation as to what his interpretation is and whether it is correct.”
“The Chairperson of CFATF, Allyson Maynard-Gibson, said when she came here she can only make a determination of compliance or non-compliance when documents are formally sent to them, either from the National Assembly process to the National Assembly or from the full committee of the Parliament. I don’t consider CFATF’s letter to be a binding interpretation about compliance and non-compliance, but he (Nandlall) interprets it to mean that our amendments are rejected when clearly it doesn’t say that,” Harmon noted.
Kaieteur News was able to peruse the CFATF letter which was sent by its Executive Director Calvin Wilson on behalf of the Chairperson Gibson. The letter is a response to one that was sent by the Attorney General on May 7, 2014.
The letter addressed to the Attorney General read that inter alia “any advice on proposed legislations has to be given in the context of the CFATF’s main role as the reviewer of the implementation of the AML/CFT standards by CFATF member countries and the need to maintain impartiality so as to ensure the integrity and objectivity of the Mutual Evaluation process.”
“It should be noted that the FATF [Financial Action Task Force] standards are minimal requirements and in most instances do not stipulate specific detailed measures,” said Wilson.
In the letter section 2(2) of the AML/CFT ACT 2009 amendment was also outlined, where APNU removed the wording “Attorney General” where it appeared and replaced it with the word “Director”. It wrote that because the functions of the Director of the FIU (Financial Intelligence Unit) are closely linked to the application for Court orders to seize and freeze criminal proceeds of the listed entities, and those functions are normally carried out by the Attorney General who is the legal advisor to the government.
CFATF did not say that it was “wrong”, which the AG insinuated, but said that “FATF recommendations do not specify any person or competent authority as being required to assume the above role. The assignment of such responsibility is at the discretion of each jurisdiction and the CFATF cannot definitively advise any country on any particular alternative.”
The letter also pronounced on the amendment to sections 8 and 9, establishing a AML/CFT Authority where members will be appointed by the National Assembly, removing the powers of the Minister to appoint the Director and the power of the President to dismiss the Director, and placing these powers within the Authority, which will also be responsible for overseeing the operations of the FIU.
CFTAF in the letter outlined that the said amendment appears to undermine “the autonomy of the FIU.” The body said that the proposed amendment which gives the AML/CFT Authority the power to “appoint and terminate the Director and Deputy Director without parameters will raise serious questions about the ability of these officials to perform their functions without undue influence.”

Attorney General
Anil Nandlall

Wilson outlined further in the letter that “there is a need to consider whether the proposed structure and membership of the AML/CFT Authority will result in an effective means of appointing the Director and allow for the termination of appointment on the basis of just cause and not allow for undue influence.”
Speaking to APNU’s amendment to extend the powers of a police officer or customs officers to seize and detain cash $10M or more anywhere in Guyana once the proceeds are suspected to be derived from illegal means, CFATF said among other things that the amendment “is a possible measure that can be instituted to comply with the obligations, and as such the CFATF cannot offer advice indicating a preference.”
CFATF in the letter expressed also that “similar provisions are in place in Trinidad and Tobago, Grenada and St. Vincent and the Grenadines with safeguards which include limiting the initial period of seizures to hours and requesting approval for any extension of the period.”
Nandlall had said in the media that the seizure of cash amendment “was rejected on the basis that it was not part of the requirement and that it is a completely unnecessary imposition.”
According to Harmon, Nandlall’s interpretation “is the kind of subterfuge, double standards that we have had to put up with…Dealing with people in high office who can look at a clear set of words and give it a different meaning altogether. He is doing a disservice to the government; he is doing a disservice to the President, because when he does this thing and when it comes out then they want to know: Is this man on a different cloud?”
Harmon who is also on the Parliamentary Special Select Committee to iron out the concerns of the AML/CFT Bill before it reaches the National Assembly said that “this is not the interpretation I would give to that letter”.
“As a member of the Committee I am disgusted over the actions of the AG to try to hoodwink us; try to again fool the Guyanese public to believe as the Opposition we do not know what we are doing.”