The tortuous path of the AMLCFT Amendment Bill

The following statement, setting out in great detail the origin of the present impasse over the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill, was issued yesterday by Presidential Adviser and Government Chip Whip, Ms Gail Teixeira, in an attempt to correct certain falsehoods being peddled by the APNU and AFC:

Chief Whip Gail Teixeira
Chief Whip Gail Teixeira

HAVING used their majority to kill the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill No 12 of 2013, the opposition parties are obliged to explain and rationalize their anti-national action, which has placed Guyana and its citizens way of life in jeopardy.
In 2007, the Government brought a new Bill, the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill No.18/2007. This Bill was meant to repeal the existing Prevention of Money Laundering Act, and bring Guyana’s statutes in compliance with international standards at the time. The Bill was sent to a Parliamentary Special Select Committee on June 7, 2007.
It may be interesting to note who were the members of the Committee: Dr. H. Jeffrey, Dr Ashni Singh, Messrs Mohammed Irfaan Ali, Odinga Lumumba, Anil Nandlall and Moses Nagamotto for the Government; Mrs. Clarissa Riehl, Messrs Winston Murray, James MacAllister and Khemraj Ramjattan for the PNC/R IG and AFC respectively. The Committee met on 15 occasions and completed its work after two years, submitted its report, which was debated and passed by the National Assembly on April 23, 2009, and assented to on August 14, 2009. The Committee amended 24 clauses of the original Bill submitted to House.
Amongst the many changes this 105-page Act introduced included the appointment of a Director of the Financial Intelligence Unit, and the establishment of the F.I.U. It is a moot point to emphasize that the appointment of the Director of the FIU by the Minister of Finance is consistent with similar such laws in other jurisdictions (for example, in the UK, it is the Secretary of State (Minister); the USA, the Secretary of the Treasury; Antigua, Australia, Bahamas, and Barbados, the Minister; Canada, Belize and Grenada, the Governor General; the Cayman Islands, the Governor; and Trinidad and Tobago by the Public Service Commission)
Following this, regulations were introduced, and one further amendment to the AMLCFT ACT 2009 between 2009 and 2010.
In keeping with constantly evolving threats to the international financial world, and the need to protect and reduce the risks from money laundering, and after Sept 2001 from financing of terrorism and terrorist groups, global standards also have been changed, and no doubt will continue to be changed.
The 2009 Act, like similar such statues passed around that time in the Caribbean region, had **to be updated to address and provide for these new threats. Guyana, like other countries in the world and the region, were assessed and advised to take measures to correct the deficiencies by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force/Financial ActionTask Force (CFATF/FATF). The March 2013 assessment of Guyana included 56 recommendations to bring Guyana’s legislative framework in line with international standards and requirements.
In the midst of the Budget debate, the President met with LOP, the APNU and the AFC to inform them of the new amendment bill and its genesis as CFATF driven and the consequences which could arise if it were not passed by the May 28, 2013 deadline. This meeting took place prior to the tabling of the Bill, and copies were shared with them prior to its tabling in the House.
The AMLCFT Amendment Bill No 12 was tabled and had its first reading on April 22, 2013. At its second reading on May 2nd, the APNU advanced that the sitting should be rescheduled and this was accommodated to May 7, 2013. At this sitting, when the Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Mr. Anil Nandlall commenced the second reading of the bill, APNU M.P. Mr. Basil Williams moved a motion to the send the bill to Special Select Committee and by majority vote this was done.
Due to the recognized urgency to move the bill through as expeditiously as possible, the Speaker convened the Committee at midnight of the same sitting and members of the PSSC on the bill were appointed. On the next day, May 8, the first meeting of the committee was held were l was elected as chairperson. The Committee was comprised of myself, Minister Dr. Ashni Singh, Attorney General and Minister Anil Nandlall, and Minister C. Rohee( 4) for the government and 5 members of the opposition- Deputy Speaker Mrs. Backer, Basil Williams, Joe Harmon, Carl Greenidge and K. Ramjattan. Minister Rohee resigned and was replaced by Minister Bishop Edghill.
One may wish to note that 3 members of the Committee had been in the 2007-2009 PSSC on the AMLCFT Act.
The PSSC met on 17 occasions between May 8 and October 22, 2013. Three meetings were postponed.
Quoting from the PSSC report tabled in the National Assembly on November 7, 2013, which states that  “ At its fourth meeting held on 20th May, 2013, Members of the main Opposition party informed the Committee that they were instructed by the Leader of the Opposition, Brigadier (Ret’d) David Granger, to discontinue further participation on the consideration of the Bill, pending a satisfactory explanation by His Excellency the President, as to the reason why the letter dated 10th April 2013,received from the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF), was not submitted to Members of the Opposition.
The Co-Chairs of CFATF in that letter had encouraged the President to disseminate the letter to Members of the Government, the Leader and Members of the Opposition and all technical and public sector officials involved in the AMLCFT (Amendment) Bill 2013,Bill No. 12/2013. The Members of A Partnership for National Unity, however, noted that it was only made aware of the letter after it was circulated to Members prior to the third meeting of the Committee held on 16th May, 2013.

Following a formal apology from Excellency President Ramotar to the Leader of the Opposition via letter dated 20th May, 2013, and circulated to Members of the Committee, the Committee at its fifth meeting held on 23rd May, 2013, resumed consideration of the Bill.”
On May 22nd the President sent a message to the National Assembly appealing to the Members of Parliament to expedite the consideration of the Bill in order to meet the CFATF May 28, 2013 deadline. This was unprecedented as no President of Guyana had done so before.
The response of the opposition was palpably derisory and when the Chair convened the meeting on May 23, 2013 the opposition turned up and by majority moved the next meeting to be held on June 12, 2013 ensuring by this action, that Guyana would not meet the deadline.
In fact they said that Guyana had until November, this was repeated when Guyana missed the second deadline in August 2013! In hindsight, the defeat of the Bill on November 7th in the National Assembly appears even more sinister. Guyana then went before the CFATF and appealed for more time. Guyana was warned and advised to report on progress in August 2013.
At the June 12th meeting the next meeting was set for July 3, 2013 due to unavailability of members.
“At the 12thMeeting held on 22nd July, 2013, Members of the Opposition again withdrew from participating in further deliberations of the Committee. Members of the Opposition at that meeting expressed concerns over a statement allegedly made by His Excellency President Ramotar, which referred to Members of the Opposition as “terrorists”. The Opposition claimed that this statement was published in the Saturday Edition of the Stabroek News dated 20th July 2013.
The Government Members denied that the President had made any such accusation and pointed out that the extract from the Saturday Edition of the Stabroek News dated 20th July, 2013 stated:
“…that the Opposition’s rejection of the bill and motion dealing with the Amaila Falls Hydroelectricity Project is an act of Terrorism against the development of Guyana.

“Nevertheless, a motion was put and carried by a majority vote, requesting that the Committee call upon His Excellency the President, to retract the statement, failing which the Opposition Members would not attend meetings of the Committee. The Opposition Members left the meeting.”

The opposition members did not attend the meetings of July 24 and 29. 2013. In the absence of the opposition members and in keeping with the Standing Orders with regard to a quorum being present and the urgency of meeting the August deadline, the Committee continued to work on the Bill and to draft amendments to strengthen and bring the Amendment Bill into compliance with all of the CFATF legislative recommendations.

At the July 29, 2013 meeting, the Committee concluded its consideration of the Bill and decided to ask the Clerk of the Committee to prepare the draft report and the Matrix of Amendments to the Bill for the next meeting scheduled for July 31. This was rescheduled to August 2, 2013. The Chairperson postponed and rescheduled the meeting to August 5, 2013 to allow members to have more time to peruse the draft report and draft Matrix of
Amendments to the Amendment Bill.
When it concluded its work and submitted its report there were 81 amendments to the Amendment Bill in keeping with the CFATF recommendations. In fact throughout the process the CFATF was receiving copies of the amendments to ensure that what the Committee was doing was in compliance with their recommendations.

The Committee met on Monday 5th August, 2013 with the purpose of concluding examination of the draft report and draft Matrix of amendments to the AMLCFT  (Amendment) Bill No. 12/2013, however, the opposition Members moved a motion to adjourn the meetings of the Committee to October 2013 and this was passed by the majority. Minister Dr. Singh’s motion for meetings to conclude the bill and to return the Bill to the House before the recess was defeated.

There is no doubt in my mind and the verbatim record and minutes illustrate that the sole  purpose of the presence of all 5 opposition members was to derail the second deadline of  August 26, 2013 by ensuring that no Report was submitted to the National Assembly before  the recess. The meeting took all of 27 minutes.

It is also at this meeting that Mr. Ramjattan raised for the first time in the committee the linkage of the AFC support for the Bill with the establishment of the Public Procurement Commission. Mr. Ramjattan attended 7 of the 17 meetings and on all occasions his presence was either to support the APNU or to lead the action to stymy the committee’s work by lodging protests with regard to the President and ensuring that meetings were not held too soon and to support Mr. Greenidge’s motion that the Committee not meet until October.
Guyana missed the second deadline of the CFATF and again Guyana appealed and was given up to November 17, 2013 for the enactment of the Bill. There was no mistake that this would be final deadline. Guyana was already being regarded as a country at risk since Guyana missed the May deadline.
On 14th October, 2013, the Committee recommenced its work after the recess period; clarification and justification were sought on several amendments made to the AMLCFT (Amendment) Bill No. 12/2013 by Members of the opposition. The information on the new and final deadline of November 17 was shared at the Committee meeting. Minister Dr Singh informed members that “since the interim pronouncement on Guyana at the May CFATF plenary the financial sector was encountering hardships in transacting business with foreign companies due to enhanced scrutiny of financial transactions emanating in and out of Guyana”. I, as chair, proposed that the committee meet twice weekly to complete its review of the draft report and the draft Matrix of Amendment to the Bill. I proposed October 17th, then October 18 and both dates were rejected. October 21st was finally agreed to for the next meeting.
I was contacted on Monday 21st October, 2013 by committee member and Deputy Speaker Mrs. Backer who sought to postpone the meeting as 2 members would be unavailable, I asked what day they had in mind and Mrs. Backer said they were thinking of October 28, 2013. I reminded her that there would be no parliamentary committee meetings in the period from October 24 – 31 as the Guyana Parliament was hosting the Surinamese Parliamentary delegation and the CPA Regional Conference of Speakers and Clerks and that we had a deadline in November to meet with the CFATF. I then decided to postpone the meeting for the next day October 22 with the view that if needed we could meet again on Wednesday October 23. I even called one influential member in the APNU on the committee and he agreed to meet at 5pm on the said day in order to meet his concerns. There was no indication that the A.F.C. member would attend.
Consequently, a meeting of the Committee was held on Tuesday 22nd October, 2013.
No members of the opposition were present and the July 29 th version of the draft report and draft Matrix of Amendments were corrected, adopted and the decision taken to send the report to be tabled in the National Assembly.
From the time this Bill surfaced in the National Assembly it was treated as probably no bill has ever been treated with before. I have been an MP for 21 years and l cannot remember any bill on the floor of the National Assembly or in committee being subjected to such undue delays, misinformation, “political horse trading and political football” as the AMLCFT (Amendment) Bill, No 12.2013.
I say with some experience as l brought the controversial MTP bill which was actually rewritten in the Committee, held hearings, concluded its work in 6 months and passed on a conscience vote. The Domestic Violence Bill also was controversial and it too completed its work in a relatively short time. Neither one it should be noted was driven by international obligations and deadlines. And l could go on and name many complex and controversial bills which went before committees.
For the opposition members in the committee and those in the House to say that (a) this was rushed and (b) the bill did not have their input is a downright lie. There were Opposition members present at 14 of the 17 meetings and they did not bring one amendment to the discussions on the bill. They said they had amendments to bring and they were encouraged to bring them so that they could be discussed. But nothing was produced. Not even on November 7th where they could have demonstrated their sincerity by tabling further amendments to the Bill as amended in Committee, but did not use that option. In fact arguments on amending the bill were discussed in the media by the opposition more than in the committee.
Today’s accusation by AFC Executive Member Moses Nagamootoo at the Party’s weekly press briefing that “The Government is wholly and solely to be blamed for the fiasco,” where he “expressed the view that the government could have heeded the opposition’s calls to recommit the bill to the Parliamentary Special Select Committee where it spent the last five months under examination and concluded that by proceeding to the final reading despite warnings of non- support was a strategy to politicize the issue on the Administration’s part.”
I wish to remind Mr. Nagamootoo that it is Mr. Greenidge who on the floor of the House yesterday said they would want to send the bill back to Committee and who a short while after that withdrew his suggestion.
When the Speaker suspended the sitting and invited different MPs to his room, including one with myself, Ms Amna Ally and Mr. Ramjattan to find a way forward, Mr. Ramjattan was belligerent that the AFC would not support the bill, no matter how good, without the establishment of the PPC.
I proposed that this bill was so critical to our country that when it would be put to the vote the opposition could consider being silent to allow it to go through and or leave the chamber during the vote, these are tactics used in parliaments. He walked out and the Deputy Speaker joined us. I then asked if the APNU and the AFC were willing to consider a specific timeline–as they had not indicated that on the floor –if the bill was returned to the Committee and members could work every day from November 8 and return the bill to the House for approval by November 13 or 14 so that Guyana could still try to make the CFATF deadline of November 17. Mrs. Backer left to consult the APNU and the AFC and returned shortly after and said that neither the APNU nor the AFC were willing to consider any restrictions on the consideration of the bill if returned to the Committee.
At that point there was nothing else to do but put the bill as amended to the vote.
I have written this chronicle for the readers so that they can judge for themselves the action of the APNU and the AFC both in the Committee and on the floor of the House.

In my mind, from the inception, the APNU and the AFC had no intention of supporting this Bill and the record of their participation in the committee proves that. The Opposition gleefully saw this as an opportunity to harm the government and if it cost Guyana, its economy and the well being of its people, then so be it.
The Bill became the opportunity to assault the country, all those who supported and urged for the bill to be passed, and people in general.
The Opposition parties have a one-track mind, bring down the government at all costs and they believe they will be installed as the next government. At least they have been consistent – cut the 2012 and 2013 Budgets, threatening to cut the 2014 Budget, killed the Amaila Hydroelectric Project, etc., defeated six (6) government Bills, and now the AMLCFT Amendment Bill.
I know of few opposition parties, even in similar situations to ours that have a majority, refusing to take national positions and worse voting against the protection of the country and its people, even when they are viciously opposed to the government.
I trust our people, and am confident that they won’t, will not be manipulated and made pawns of the opposition’s grand design.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.