Ramotar modifies position on FIU

Head of State, Donald Ramotar, has agreed to insulate the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) from any form of politicisation. Ramotar noted, yesterday, that as regards the amendments proposed by A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), “Government is prepared to compromise on these amendments and indeed, we have laid in the Special Select Committee,

Head of State Donald Ramotar

counter-amendments.” He said that the counter-amendments proposed are designed and intended to address the major concerns raised by APNU in relation to strengthening the governance architecture of the FIU in the legislative regime, while at the same time insulating it from political influence and indeed, any form of politicisation, in order to maintain its independence and functional autonomy. According to Ramotar, “our counter amendments provide for the establishment of an (Anti Money Laundering) Authority as contemplated by APNU.” He said that the Anti-Money Laundering Authority shall comprise of the Heads of Agencies that have a role and responsibility in relation to the combating of money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism. According to Ramotar, “We propose that the Commissioner of Police, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Governor of the Central Bank, the Commissioner General of the Guyana Revenue Authority, the Solicitor General, the Head of the Customs Anti Narcotics Unit (CANU), the Registrar of Deeds and Companies and a representative from the Private Sector Commission (PSC) in the area of banking and commerce, comprise of this authority and appointed by the Minister of Finance.” According to Ramotar, the counter proposal to that of APNU is that that subjectivity and discretion are wholly removed from the appointment process and that almost all those persons are statutory office holders. “I believe that this formulation addresses the conceptual concern of APNU in terms of strengthening the governance infrastructure in the law while at the same time, removing the process from the realm of politics.” As it relates to the currency seizures, Ramotar maintains that the current law requires no change on this issue. The Caribbean Financial Action Taskforce (CFATF) did not recommend any in relation to this matter. Chairman of the Private Sector Commission (PSC), Ronald Webster, during the consultation on the failure to pass the Anti Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill, had said that the PSC “does not support a politically selected FIU.” He said that the Private Sector Commission had found favour with the Barbados model, which has an Authority in place to which the FIU reports. This Authority is made up of persons drawn from agencies involved directly or indirectly in managing the problems associated with money laundering and terrorism. In giving a breakdown of theBarbados model, Webster noted that the Chairperson of the Authority is drawn from the University of the West Indies and its deputy from the private sector.

Chairman of the Private Sector Commission, Ronald Webster

He said that the other members of that 11-person Authority are the Solicitor General, the Commissioner of Police, the Comptroller of Customs, which in Guyana’s case would be the head of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA), the Supervisor of Insurance, the Registrar of Companies, the Central Bank of Barbados and two additional members drawn from the private sector who have expertise in banking and insurance. In his appeal for the passage of the anti-money laundering Bill, Webster lamented that a failure would result in “capital flows out of the country, a weakening of the currency, higher electricity rates problems with transfers and things of that nature”. Webster warned that failure to pass the Bill, will bite; “It won’t bite now, it will bite later…we need to avoid this at all cost, we must avoid it.” According to the Chairman of the Private Sector Commission, the issue is not about politics but the very lives of Guyanese. Ramotar at the time responded that CFATF was beginning to have problems with the Barbadian model and that what Government is looking to have passed is a CFATF-compliant Bill. “My contention is that we have a Bill at the moment that CFATF has pronounced on and found it to be compliant, and that is the Bill we should pass, if there is any amendment to that it has to be within the framework of what CFATF,” according to Ramotar.