Procurement Commission goes hand-in-hand with Anti-Money Laundering Legislation

By Dominic Gaskin, AFC Treasurer

Guyana has a dismal track record when it comes to good governance and the implementation of laws and regulations. The result is that we have become an extremely corrupt country with widespread criminality at all levels. Much of the money entering and circulating in our economy each year represents the proceeds of criminal activities such as narco-trafficking, gun running, illegal fuel importation or undeclared gold exportation. A lot of the property-purchasing and construction taking place, whether residential or commercial, is for the purpose of diluting inexplicable wealth into transported holdings. Many have turned a blind eye to this situation, quietly enjoying the trickle-down benefits of all these activities, while ignoring the tremendous long-term harm accruing to our society and our economy. The AFC is particularly concerned with the effects of this criminality on the Government of Guyana, and the scope for collusion that it presents. Tasked with implementing policies to fight crime, while at the same time being the biggest spender within our economy, the Government is a vulnerable entity when it comes to facilitating the process of money laundering. The current political impasse surrounding the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Amendment Bill has brought into focus the nexus between corrupt governance and organized crime. The Alliance For Change has taken a clear position, linking its support for the Bill to the establishment of the constitutionally mandated Public Procurement Commission designed to monitor and regulate the awarding of Government contracts. This is not optional. This is a constitutional requirement which the Government has refused to implement for over a decade. The AFC believes that the Guyanese public deserves the benefits of both an effective and independent Public Procurement Commission and strong anti-money laundering legislation. The Government has now taken to scare-mongering in order to get the AFC to back down from its position, and is targeting the business community with its doomsday warnings. Some have joined them in their efforts, without so much as acknowledging the option for Guyana to have both the AML/CFT legislation and a Public Procurement Commission. Their only concern is for the quick passage of the AML/CFT Bill in order for Guyana to avoid being black-listed by the international community. Unfortunately it is not that simple. The issue of Guyana’s compliance or non-compliance has to do with a list of forty-nine recommendations, developed by the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force (FATF), and recognized as the international standard for combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism.  The Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) is an associate member of the FATF and has endorsed these recommendations.  Its main objective is to achieve the effective implementation of, and compliance with, the FATF recommendations and, in doing so, it is guided by comprehensive Mutual Evaluation Reports (MERs) carried out for each of its member countries. The CFATF holds two plenary meetings each year, one in May and the other in November, at which these MERs are adopted, additional reports presented, and decisions made regarding follow-up processes required for each member. It subsequently issues a Public Statement identifying those members whose strategic deficiencies pose a threat to the international financial system with regard to money laundering and financing of terrorism. On May 30 of this year, after its plenary meeting in Nicaragua, CFATF in its Public Statement described Belize and Guyana as “Jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies that have not made sufficient progress in addressing the deficiencies or have not complied with their Action Plan developed with the CFATF to address the deficiencies.” It also called on its members to “consider the risks arising from the deficiencies associated with each jurisdiction”.  In addition, the statement warned, “If Guyana does not take specific steps by November 2013, then the CFATF will identify Guyana as not taking sufficient steps to address its AML/CFT deficiencies and will take the additional steps of calling upon its Members to consider implementing counter measures to protect their financial systems from the ongoing money laundering and terrorist financing risks emanating from Guyana, and at that time CFATF will consider referring Guyana to the Financial Action Task Force International Cooperation Review Group (FATF ICRG).” Before attempting to decipher what these seemingly vague statements may augur for the average Guyanese citizen, it would be useful to examine the path chosen by our Government that landed us in this predicament in the first place. Guyana joined CFATF in 2002 and had its first mutual evaluation as part of CFATF’s second round of Mutual Evaluations in 2006. Guyana’s next Mutual Evaluation Report was adopted at CFATF’s May 2011 plenary meeting, and was based on an on-site visit to Guyana by an evaluation team during the period 18–29 January 2010. The team met officials and representatives of all relevant Guyana government agencies as well as the private sector. In that report, Guyana was rated partially compliant or non-compliant on a total of forty-one recommendations, and as a result was placed on CFATF’s “expedited follow-up” regime and ordered to report at every plenary meeting on progress made to correct the deficiencies identified in the MER. It needs to be noted here that the follow-up process is only applicable to members whose ratings show significant deficiencies. Where the failings identified in the reports are particularly serious, the plenary can decide on a more expedited timetable for follow-up reports, rather than the two-year norm. This was the case with Guyana. In successive follow-up reports, Guyana’s improvements were not considered substantial, and the country has now been placed in enhanced follow-up, which is a further downgrade in the follow-up process. The latest report refers to the “high level mission” which visited Guyana in March of this year. It needs to be stressed that a “high-level mission” represents one of the final steps in CFATF’s process of dealing with non-compliant members, with the next step being the above mentioned Public Statement. Then came the famous letter from CFATF (deliberately withheld from the political opposition) dated April 10, 2013 and addressed to President Ramotar, expressing, among other things, concern that his government had been unable to provide the high-level mission with a timeframe for passing the relevant legislation. Less than two weeks later, on April 22, the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill was tabled in the National Assembly. From that point on the Government assumed a sense of urgency, and began issuing repeated warnings about the consequences of not approving the bill before the next CFATF meeting at the end of May. But for Guyana to have been placed on expedited follow-up by CFATF in 2011 and then moved through the various stages of enhanced follow-ups, is a clear indication that the PPP-C Government has failed over many, many years to effectively address the issues of money laundering and financing of terrorism. The Government of Guyana would have been aware of the FATF recommendations for over a decade and could have done a whole lot more to enact adequate legislation and to strengthen its monitoring, investigating and enforcing capabilities to achieve better compliance ratings. Instead, it dragged its feet and stalled, while pretending to the international bodies that it was serious about combating money laundering and financing of terrorism. Now that it has suddenly realized that FATF and CFATF are more than just talk shops and are capable of sanctioning non-compliant countries, it is seeking to blame the political opposition for what may happen when this kicks in. While the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill is supposed to address a significant number of the recommendations with which Guyana is not in compliance, its passage alone will not be sufficient to immediately remove Guyana from the follow-up process, since other deficiencies will remain. It is also unlikely that this PPP-C Government, which has allowed lawlessness to pervade its society and an informal economy to boom to its current extent, can suddenly pull the plug on this fountain of wealth without affecting many of its friends and constituents. One is therefore forced to wonder whether the PPP-C has any intention of Guyana’s becoming fully compliant with the recommendations of the CFATF. It is as a result of the Government’s handling of this matter over a considerable period of time, and not simply the non-passage of untested legislation, that Guyana has been cited in a CFATF Public Statement. The immediate consequence of this is that Guyana may now face enhanced due diligence for financial transactions with reporting entities in compliant foreign countries. In other words, financial institutions in more compliant countries may be legally bound to require additional documentation when transferring money to or from Guyana. It is possible that the CFATF Public Statement is specifically directed at CFATF member countries and that, for now, only these countries may be required to consider the money laundering or financing of terrorism risks arising from Guyana’s deficiencies. What happens next depends on CFATF’s November plenary meeting. If, as is quite likely, Guyana is deemed not to have taken sufficient steps to address its identified deficiencies, then the next Public Statement will call on members to consider implementing counter measures to protect their financial systems from the ongoing money laundering and terrorist financing risks emanating from Guyana. These counter measures may differ from the enhanced due diligence measures currently recommended, depending on the guidelines in place in individual jurisdictions. Again, this call may be limited to CFATF members.  However, should CFATF make good on its threat to refer Guyana to the Financial Action Task Force International Cooperation Review Group (FATF ICRG), then Guyana will receive the attention of a much larger number of countries. FATF issues two levels of statements for its members’ consideration following its thrice yearly meetings. The first is the Public Statement which lists (currently thirteen) countries with strategic deficiencies. The second is known as the “Improving Global AML/CFT Compliance: On-going Process” document and lists countries which have provided a “written high-level political commitment to address the identified deficiencies”. This list currently comprises twenty countries. Trinidad and Tobago was removed from this list one year ago after it made significant progress in improving its AML/CFT regime. Interested persons may wish to enquire from the business community in that country what the effects were of being listed as deficient by FATF. The AFC urges the Guyanese public to insist on the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission. It also calls on the Private Sector Commission and the Insurance Association of Guyana to issue a statement, of similar proportions to their full-page advertisements for passage of the AML/CFT bill, in support of the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission as provided for in the Public Procurement Act of 2003.

Dominic Gaskin is the son-in-law of David Granger, APNU's mole within the AFC, hell bent on derailing the progress of Guyana, should Guyana be blacklisted, the blame would be place by the Guyanese populace at the door steps of the AFC/APNU.

So, let me get this; one is by association stained! I wonder why you miss jaddeo's 29 tons of swag from a crook?

The money laundering bill is mere protocol, a promise to abide by specific international rules. The PPP has done nothing with its own rules so who say they will this? If this is urgent so is local government. International scrutiny of the nations financial transaction is perhaps best for us since it means that someone is watching vs no one caring to watch.

The state has nothing to hide, one wonders why the joint opposition rejects the anti-money laundering bill and refusing to produce their assets to the integrity commission of the Parliament.....Are the members of the joint opposition riding stuff?

Then let us see how Bobby came to Sanata assets..or IffArt to the Lenora property or how those PPP curroptocrats came to exclusive zones on state property. Members of the opposition can only steal from themselves. The PPP has their hands on the nations till.

Anti- Money  Launder Legislation

Concerns

will have to be addressed in

National Assembly

- Granger

A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) has announced that its concerns were not heard in the dissolved Select Committee and as such they will be seeking to get all its apprehensions regarding the passage of the Anti Money Laundering Bill addressed in the National Assembly.
At a recent press conference the opposition bloc made it clear through its leader David Granger that the Bill is flawed, and they will not approve a Bill that cannot function properly, since it would be counterproductive to the Guyanese populace.
“That bill is flawed, we have had an Act, an Anti Money Laundering and Counter Financial Terrorism Act for four years and they have been trying to push through changes in four months. We have only seen and have been working with it for four months and we are not going to approve a flawed Bill. We made it clear we had wanted to see a Bill that has teeth,” Granger posited.
The Special Select Committee was established in the National Assembly to addresses the concerns of the Anti Money Laundering legislation that the government or the Oppositions (APNU and Alliance for Change AFC) might have, with aim of finding common ground for its passage in the next sitting of parliament.
However, as it stands currently, the government took the decision to dissolve the Select Committee, while citing that all the concerns not addressed will be done so in the National Assembly.
Both the AFC and the APNU expressed concerns over the dissolving of the Select Committee even though both parties were not present when the government made the decision.
The AFC posited through its Leader Khemraj Ramjattan that it was pressed with other obligations while the APNU through Granger said that “as far as the actual circumstances under which the PPP members met, we would like to make it clear that on the day it was called, the President asked me to attended a meeting concerning the Venezuelan oppression and on the next day we had the Shadow Cabinet meeting. The Executive branch has their meeting on Tuesday morning and we have our meeting on Tuesday evening, this has been known for over a year. We were very surprised an attempt was made to have the meeting then and we were very disappointed that the Chairperson of the (Select) Committee proceeded because we needed consensus and when the matter comes before the court, we will do what we would’ve wanted to do in the Committee.”
The APNU and AFC have both expressed unease with the Anti Money Laundering Legislation. The AFC has made its position clear that for them to give their support to the Bill, a Public Procurement Commission must be firstly implemented, while APNU has called for a more comprehensive legislation that would be functional. “We are not going to give the Guyanese people something that can’t work,” Granger declared.

The Opposition wants to be PROTECTED from JAIL TERM. They will continue to THIEF and DESTROY.

The AFC/Pnc have a vested interest in preventing the passage of the money laundering bill, after all 50% of their income comes from illegal washing of money from their drug activities. It would be a double whammie as their drug trade would suffer as well as the washing of the proceeds. The pepper sauce man and other drug affiliates have already started building properties for Ramjattan and Granger in pradoville, but he is careful to put the property in their names. 

The Public Procurement Act was passed in 2003. So, why is it that the PPP/C does not want to establish the Commission? It's been 10 years; 

the PPP/C have a very dismal track record when it comes to good Governance and the implementation of laws and regulations.

Much of the money entering and circulating in our economy each year represents the proceeds of criminal activities such as narco-trafficking, gun running, illegal fuel importation or undeclared gold exportation. A lot of the property-purchasing and construction taking place, whether residential or commercial, is for the purpose of diluting inexplicable wealth into transported holdings. Many have turned a blind eye to this situation, quietly enjoying the trickle-down benefits of all these activities, while ignoring the tremendous long-term harm accruing to our society and our economy.

Anti-money laundering Bills in limbo…

Western diplomats fail to budge APNU

By Leonard Gildarie

Western diplomats yesterday met with the main Parliamentary Opposition as worry continues over an ongoing stalemate regarding critical anti-money laundering legislation.

APNU leaders (right) and top diplomats meeting yesterday.

It is unlikely that a November deadline can be met, with the faction making it clear that it will not support the legislation when it comes before the National Assembly next week.
Failure to pass the legislation could see international bodies, tasked with guiding countries into introducing measures to reduce dirty monies being transferred through the financial system, recommending almost certain sanctions.
Already the private sector, banks and insurance companies have warned of severe implications for money transfers, payments for goods and delays in business if Guyana is blacklisted by trading partners for being non-compliant.
There have been reports from businesses that bank transfers have been held up by overseas banks as questions arose over the transactions.
The issue has sharply divided the Government and Opposition.
Government had tabled the legislative changes at the last Parliamentary session, but the Opposition, despite protests over the deadline by the Government, sent it to a special select committee to be fine-tuned. The problem was that the committee’s work suffered a number of delays.
An exasperated Government, in the absence of the Opposition members, completed work of the special committee last week and announced that the legislation was going to be sent back to the National Assembly, in a race against time to meet the November deadline.
However, the Opposition, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Alliance For Change (AFC), which effectively control the House by a one-seat majority, have both signaled intentions not to lend outright support.
Yesterday, senior Parliamentarian for APNU, Joseph Harmon, who was among the delegation that met the diplomats, made it clear that nothing has changed.
“We have said it before. We are unhappy with the legislation in its current format. We cannot support it.”
APNU will more likely recommend that the legislation be sent back to a special select committee to be fine-tuned.
The AFC, on the other hand, has tied any support of the legislation to the appointment of members of the long-awaited Public Procurement Commission. The Opposition has been clamouring for the commission to be operationalised soonest to address concerns of Government contracts. There have been accusations that contracts, to the tune of millions, are being manipulated, with the aggrieved parties not having timely recourse.
According to APNU,the meeting yesterday with its leadership involved ambassadors and high commissioners from the United States of America, Great Britain, Canada and the European Union. The meeting was held at the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, Hadfield Street.
“The main concern of the diplomats was the status of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill. APNU used the opportunity to restate its concerns about the short comings of the current legislation and the fact that the work of the Select Committee was brought to an abrupt end without the benefit of significant input from the Partnership and other interested parties.”
APNU, a coalition of 10 parties that contested the 2011 General and Regional Elections, said in a statement that it assured the western diplomats that the partnership is desirous of legislation that is not flawed; that restructures and strengthens the capacity of the Financial Intelligence Unit and addresses all of the deficits of the current one.
Present at the meeting were US Ambassador D. Brent Hardt; British High Commissioner, Andrew Ayre; Canadian High Commissioner, Dr. Nicole Giles and European Union Representative, Derek Lambe. APNU was represented by Leader of the Opposition, Brigadier (Ret’d) David Granger; Dr. Rupert Roopnaraine; Basil Williams; Carl Greenidge, Joseph Harmon, and Ronald Bulkan.
The current Parliament has been the administration’s toughest in its 21-year hold on power.
Several Bills, including two critical ones for the Amaila Falls hydro project, have been rejected by the Opposition. There have also been two years of cuts to the National Budget.
Several projects including the airport expansion remain stalled.

WITH CORRUPTIONS ALL OVER THE

PLACE I DO NOT BLAME THE APNU/AFC

TO TEACH THE PPP/C SOME MANNERS

Mr Ramotar is very corrupt. He sat on the GuySuCo board and did nothing as Raj Singh/Jagdeo killed the industry. He sat on the Omai board and draw down thousands of USD and did nothing to stop gold smuggling. He gave his son to run the fiber optic cables and he messed up the job. Now the taxpayers will have to spend millions to fix that too.