.jpg)
THE opposition has again demonstrated that their parliamentary agenda is driven by politics and by selfish pursuits, and has very little to do with what is important for Guyana and the welfare of Guyanese, which ought to be the paramount consideration overwhelming parliamentarians when they sit to deliberate.
This view was expressed by Attorney General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall during a recent interview on the National Communications Network on the situation which now faces Guyana with regard to the non-passage of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill (AMLCFT).
Nandlall, referring to the government’s visit in Nicaragua in May, 2013, noted that its delegation attended a meeting organised by the umbrella body, Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF), where Guyana was supposed to have undergone an assessment of the country’s ability to effectively counter money laundering and financing of terrorism.
The AG pointed out that prior to the meeting, Guyana had been given recommendations to implement in tandem with countries around the Caribbean. Among those recommendations were certain legislative amendments to be implemented. The AMLCFT Bill was subsequently crafted, encapsulating all the suggested amendments and laid in the National Assembly.
Prior to this, the AG pointed out that the opposition was fully briefed of what the recommendations are, and why they must be implemented. In addition, the diplomatic community organised a forum which was attended by all the political parties. There presentations were made; and discussions were held updating all present in respect of the recommendations which have to be implemented, and the consequences which are likely to flow if these recommendations were not implemented.
“The recommendations were two-fold, they were legislative and non-legislative in nature,” he said. In terms of legislative requirements those are the subject of the AMLCFT bill which requires the support of the opposition, for it to be passed in the National Assembly. The opposition was fully apprised with all the relevant information.
All of this was done before the Bill was laid in Parliament, the AG noted. “It was on the order paper for nearly six weeks. After being read for the first time six weeks elapsed before it was read a second time. When it was read a second time, the opposition then using their majority moved the motion for it to be sent to the select committee. The reason which they advanced then was that they needed more time to study the bill.”
The Bill was then sent to the Select Committee which began its work almost immediately. The first request which the Opposition made was they wanted more documents.
“We supplied every single document which was exchanged among the Government of Guyana, the Financial Intelligence Unit and the CFATF. They next requested adjournments of the meetings to longer periods. All of this the Government complied with. Their next request, was for stakeholders to be invited to make submissions to the committee, again the government complied. When these submissions were received we began to analyse them. All this time, outside of the select committee, the opposition continued to make pronouncements that they are not going to support the bill, that they want the Government to do things which they are demanding and they continued to make a host of demands, none of which has anything whatsoever to do with the bill.”
The AG observed however, that during all the sittings of the committee, the opposition members were conspicuously absent. “The AFC (Alliance For Change) whose representative on the committee was Khemraj Ramjattan, hardly ever attended and the APNU (Apeople’s Partnership for National Unity) only sent one member on different occasions. However, we persevered and we continued to press along, then at one point in time, the President made a statement which the opposition completely misinterpreted and formed the view that the President labelled them terrorists, and as a result of that they came to the committee and they informed the committee that they will withdraw their participation fully and absolutely. From then on the committee began to function with only Government members.”
The Committee comprehensively examined the stakeholders’ submissions, taking them on board as far as possible and changed the bill to accommodate those suggestions. The stakeholders included the Director of Public Prosecution, the Bank of Guyana, the Guyana Women’s Lawyer’s Association, Messrs Ram and Mc Crae, Raymon Gaskin, and the Justice Institute.
Nandlall added that while the committee was examining the amendments they were at the same time liaising with the CFATF to ensure that the changes made to the draft bill were acceptable. “We tried to complete the work before the August 7, sitting obviously recognising that Parliament will go into recess and then we will have difficulty in meeting the time frame which has been prescribed for these amendments to be passed by the National Assembly,” he explained.
Significantly the opposition first doubted the government’s contention that there are time frames and what those time frames are. As a result, the select committee wrote to CFATF and inquired. CFATF responded and informed that the deadline is August 26, 2013 if the amendments were to be considered at the November meeting of the CFATF.
The AG said that this “was the reasoning and rationale behind the Government pushing the agenda of this committee forward to ensure that we pass the bill within the time frame. Unfortunately at the last sitting of the committee when we completed all the work and was in the process of examining the final draft report of the committee to take to the assembly along with the now sanitised bill which would have contained the amendments which were done in the select committee, the opposition for the first time turned up in all their numbers and by a majority vote, voted that the meeting of the committee be adjourned until October and effectively rendering it impossible for the bill to be taken to National Assembly for the August 7 sitting.”
Over the last few months the opposition has advanced no intelligent argument for their non support of this bill. “All they have said is that they want certain things that the Government must deliver and then they will support this bill, they have not advanced a singular sensible reason relating to the bill for their non support,” AG Nandlall stated.
Observing that the August deadline would be missed, he said that Guyana will not be considered again at the November meeting. “The CFATF will now issue what is called an internationally adverse statement in respect of Guyana. They will invite all countries, organisations and businesses internationally to consider what sanctions they may wish to impose on Guyana, because Guyana is now a ‘non compliant jurisdiction’. The menu of sanctions which is imposable is very wide ranging and that essentially is what the blacklisting is about,” the AG explained.
Any transfer of money in and out of Guyana now, will be the subject of restrictions, some of them absolute, some conditional, he observed. Trade across the border in Guyana will be now be severely hampered. This will have harsh consequences on all commerce, economic activity and economic life in Guyana and eventually, will affect the livelihood of every single Guyanese.
He also stated that the fight against money laundering and terrorism has nothing to do with politics, and should never be the subject of political bargaining, “unless of course the Opposition has an interest to protect money laundering and to protect the financing of terrorism, other than that what is the basis of their non support?”
“This is simply a crime fighting legislation and there should be political consensus on it. We have to combat crime which is a serious social problem, and therefore one would expect that crime which has an international component like money laundering and financing of terrorism… Guyana is in unison and politicians with consensus would come out in strong support, unfortunately you have non- support of the opposition on this matter.” (GINA)
This view was expressed by Attorney General (AG) and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall during a recent interview on the National Communications Network on the situation which now faces Guyana with regard to the non-passage of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill (AMLCFT).
Nandlall, referring to the government’s visit in Nicaragua in May, 2013, noted that its delegation attended a meeting organised by the umbrella body, Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF), where Guyana was supposed to have undergone an assessment of the country’s ability to effectively counter money laundering and financing of terrorism.
The AG pointed out that prior to the meeting, Guyana had been given recommendations to implement in tandem with countries around the Caribbean. Among those recommendations were certain legislative amendments to be implemented. The AMLCFT Bill was subsequently crafted, encapsulating all the suggested amendments and laid in the National Assembly.
Prior to this, the AG pointed out that the opposition was fully briefed of what the recommendations are, and why they must be implemented. In addition, the diplomatic community organised a forum which was attended by all the political parties. There presentations were made; and discussions were held updating all present in respect of the recommendations which have to be implemented, and the consequences which are likely to flow if these recommendations were not implemented.
“The recommendations were two-fold, they were legislative and non-legislative in nature,” he said. In terms of legislative requirements those are the subject of the AMLCFT bill which requires the support of the opposition, for it to be passed in the National Assembly. The opposition was fully apprised with all the relevant information.
All of this was done before the Bill was laid in Parliament, the AG noted. “It was on the order paper for nearly six weeks. After being read for the first time six weeks elapsed before it was read a second time. When it was read a second time, the opposition then using their majority moved the motion for it to be sent to the select committee. The reason which they advanced then was that they needed more time to study the bill.”
The Bill was then sent to the Select Committee which began its work almost immediately. The first request which the Opposition made was they wanted more documents.
“We supplied every single document which was exchanged among the Government of Guyana, the Financial Intelligence Unit and the CFATF. They next requested adjournments of the meetings to longer periods. All of this the Government complied with. Their next request, was for stakeholders to be invited to make submissions to the committee, again the government complied. When these submissions were received we began to analyse them. All this time, outside of the select committee, the opposition continued to make pronouncements that they are not going to support the bill, that they want the Government to do things which they are demanding and they continued to make a host of demands, none of which has anything whatsoever to do with the bill.”
The AG observed however, that during all the sittings of the committee, the opposition members were conspicuously absent. “The AFC (Alliance For Change) whose representative on the committee was Khemraj Ramjattan, hardly ever attended and the APNU (Apeople’s Partnership for National Unity) only sent one member on different occasions. However, we persevered and we continued to press along, then at one point in time, the President made a statement which the opposition completely misinterpreted and formed the view that the President labelled them terrorists, and as a result of that they came to the committee and they informed the committee that they will withdraw their participation fully and absolutely. From then on the committee began to function with only Government members.”
The Committee comprehensively examined the stakeholders’ submissions, taking them on board as far as possible and changed the bill to accommodate those suggestions. The stakeholders included the Director of Public Prosecution, the Bank of Guyana, the Guyana Women’s Lawyer’s Association, Messrs Ram and Mc Crae, Raymon Gaskin, and the Justice Institute.
Nandlall added that while the committee was examining the amendments they were at the same time liaising with the CFATF to ensure that the changes made to the draft bill were acceptable. “We tried to complete the work before the August 7, sitting obviously recognising that Parliament will go into recess and then we will have difficulty in meeting the time frame which has been prescribed for these amendments to be passed by the National Assembly,” he explained.
Significantly the opposition first doubted the government’s contention that there are time frames and what those time frames are. As a result, the select committee wrote to CFATF and inquired. CFATF responded and informed that the deadline is August 26, 2013 if the amendments were to be considered at the November meeting of the CFATF.
The AG said that this “was the reasoning and rationale behind the Government pushing the agenda of this committee forward to ensure that we pass the bill within the time frame. Unfortunately at the last sitting of the committee when we completed all the work and was in the process of examining the final draft report of the committee to take to the assembly along with the now sanitised bill which would have contained the amendments which were done in the select committee, the opposition for the first time turned up in all their numbers and by a majority vote, voted that the meeting of the committee be adjourned until October and effectively rendering it impossible for the bill to be taken to National Assembly for the August 7 sitting.”
Over the last few months the opposition has advanced no intelligent argument for their non support of this bill. “All they have said is that they want certain things that the Government must deliver and then they will support this bill, they have not advanced a singular sensible reason relating to the bill for their non support,” AG Nandlall stated.
Observing that the August deadline would be missed, he said that Guyana will not be considered again at the November meeting. “The CFATF will now issue what is called an internationally adverse statement in respect of Guyana. They will invite all countries, organisations and businesses internationally to consider what sanctions they may wish to impose on Guyana, because Guyana is now a ‘non compliant jurisdiction’. The menu of sanctions which is imposable is very wide ranging and that essentially is what the blacklisting is about,” the AG explained.
Any transfer of money in and out of Guyana now, will be the subject of restrictions, some of them absolute, some conditional, he observed. Trade across the border in Guyana will be now be severely hampered. This will have harsh consequences on all commerce, economic activity and economic life in Guyana and eventually, will affect the livelihood of every single Guyanese.
He also stated that the fight against money laundering and terrorism has nothing to do with politics, and should never be the subject of political bargaining, “unless of course the Opposition has an interest to protect money laundering and to protect the financing of terrorism, other than that what is the basis of their non support?”
“This is simply a crime fighting legislation and there should be political consensus on it. We have to combat crime which is a serious social problem, and therefore one would expect that crime which has an international component like money laundering and financing of terrorism… Guyana is in unison and politicians with consensus would come out in strong support, unfortunately you have non- support of the opposition on this matter.” (GINA)
