PPP/C rejects new AML/CFT Bill

Gail Teixeira

… says amendments non-compliant with int’l requirements

The People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) said that the proposed Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill contains some provisions that have been rejected by the Caribbean Action Task Force as well as the Financial Action Task Force and Government runs the risk of passing into a law a bill that may not be compliant with international requirements.

Attorney General Basil Williams will table the Bill today in the House. It contained measures which the PPP/C Administration had refused to include in the Bill that the then Opposition had proposed. At a news conference on Wednesday morning at Freedom House, Gail Teixeira reading from a prepared statement said as members of the PPP/C and as former Members of Parliament on the two Parliamentary Special Select Committees on the 2013 Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bills in the 10th Parliament, “we wish to inform the public that the 2015 Bill Number 4 slated for tabling for first reading at the June 25th sitting of the National Assembly is the revised Bill compiled in the two previous committees with all the APNU amendments inserted.” Teixeira was supported by former Attorney General Anil Nandlall and Bishop Juan Edghill.

Anil Nandlall

Teixeira said all the contentious APNU amendments which were obstacles to reaching consensus on the 2013 AMLCFT (Amendment) Bill based on FATF requirements and recommendations are now before the National Assembly in the form of Bill Number 4 of 2015. She detailed some of the objections both the PPP/C and the international bodies had raised over the APNU amendments.

Among the amendments proposed by the Government is to remove the power of the Attorney General and invest it in the Director of the Financial Intelligence Unit. According to the PPP/C, the Government proposed Amendment to Section 2(2) of the AMLCFT Act 2009 by deleting the words ‘Attorney General’ wherever they appear and replacing them with the word ‘Director. “It should be noted that the primary function of the FIU as stated in the first criterion of FATF Recommendation 26 of the Third Round is to serve as a national centre for receiving, analysing and disseminating disclosures of suspicious transaction reports and other relevant information concerning suspected Money Laundering or Financing Terrorism activities. “Countries should consider whether the Director of the FIU given his main function is the appropriate official with respect to resources and qualifications to ensure that entities are listed, evidence presented to judges in connection with listing and orders by judges in relation to listing are reviewed. This function is closely linked to the application for court orders to seize and freeze criminal proceeds of the listed entities, a function that is carried out usually by the Attorney General in his/her role as legal advisor to the Government to fulfil a country’s international legal obligations. Additionally, the Attorney General in his/her role as legal adviser to the State helps to establish the legality of listing and the actions to be done in accordance with it. It should be noted that along with the jurisdictions mentioned in your letter of May 7, 2014, the above function has also been assigned to the Attorney General in Guatemala, El Salvador, and Nicaragua.”

The other contentious amendment is the establishment of a AMLCFT Authority which members will be appointed by the National Assembly, and removing the powers of the Minister to appoint the Director and the power of the President to dismiss the Director and placing these powers in the Authority. The Authority will also be responsible for overseeing the operations of the FIU. The PPP/C is contending that the above amendment as stated appears to undermine the autonomy of the FIU. “As stipulated in the criteria of FATF Recommendation 26, the FIU should have sufficient operational independence and autonomy to ensure that it is free from undue influence or interference. The assigning of the responsibility of oversight of the operations of the FIU to the AML/CFT Authority effectively eliminates the operational independence and autonomy and does not comply with the requirement of Recommendation 26.”

The third issue which has raised the ire of the PPP/C is the amendment to Section 37 by extending the powers of a Police Officer or customs officer to seize and detain cash $10 million or more anywhere in Guyana upon suspicion that such cash is derived from a serious offence, will be used to commit a serious offence, involved in money laundering or where a false declaration was made, and also giving these same powers to the FIU. “The above amendment is not a specific requirement of the FATF standards. It is noted that no deficiency with respect to this obligation was noted in Guyana’s Mutual Evaluation Report for the Third Round. 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 seizure to hours and requiring judicial approval for any extension of the period.”

The PPP/C is arguing that in spite of this information which was shared with all the members of the Parliamentary Special Select Committee in May 2014, a year ago and fully discussed in the committee as reflected in the minutes and verbatim records of the PSSC, Bill Number 4 the AML/CFT Amendment now includes all of the amendments proposed by the A Partnership For National Unity (APNU). “Most vile of these are new Section 8 with regards to the appointment and termination of the Director and the Deputy Director of the Financial Intelligence Unit( FIU) by the National Assembly , and, Section 9 with regards to the appointment of an Attorney-at-law and an Accountant of the FIU by the National Assembly,” the PPP/C said.

The party has contended that the APNU succeeded deliberately and knowingly in blocking a FATF compliant amendment bill from reaching the National Assembly in time to meet the final of many missed deadlines in June 2014. “This agenda caused Guyana to be brought before FATF for targeted review in June 2014. For the last year, Guyana and its citizens have felt the consequences. The APNU then insisted that if the Bill did not reflect their amendments and the Alliance For Change’s (AFC) conditionality external to the PSSC, the Bill would not reach the floor of the National Assembly. Having done so, the APNU/AFC coalition is now proceeding to achieve its 2013 and 2014 objective of bringing their bill which they know is not FATF compliant.”

Guyana was referred by FATF to its Americas Review Group In September 2014 and went before this body on two occasions (most recent April 2015) to work on an agreed Action Plan with targets and six monthly reports to ensure targets were being achieved. These targets included legislative and non-legislative interventions. “At no time did the FATF targeted review include the 2013 Amendment Bill with APNU’s amendments. At the last meeting in April 2015, it was agreed that there was need for a slew of regulations to bring the bill in compliance. It is noted that no regulations have been tabled,” PPP/C said. “The People’s Progressive Party Civic remains committed to ensuring that a FATF compliant Bill is passed…that Bill Number 4 2015 is not in compliance with the FATF recommendations. The PPPC therefore has no choice but to oppose Bill Number 4 2015 and to recommend that FATF be consulted soonest on this said Bill.”