THE Parliamentary Select Committee, yesterday, failed to reach an agreement that would see the completion of its review of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) (Amendment) Bill.

They met from noon, for an hour and a half, with the intention of finalising their report, after they had “consensually” completed reviewing the Bill late Sunday night, the provisions of which were supported by the entire Committee.
This was according to Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Mr. Anil Nandlall, in whose name the legislation was re-tabled in the National Assembly, last January, after being defeated by the combined Opposition in November 2013.
He faulted the Opposition for the Committee not being able to finish its work.
In an exclusive interview with the Guyana Chronicle, Nandlall attributed blame to the Opposition for the Committee not being in a position to conclude its deliberations.
“Their agenda has been to stall and delay the process and everything which happened in this committee corroborates that,” he claimed.
Eleventh hour
Nandlall emphasised that the proposals for amendments made by the Opposition were done at the “eleventh hour” and are problematic.
“The draftsperson attached to the Committee, from the Office of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel, reported that, as a result of the late hour at which the proposals were made by the Opposition, and having regard to the complexity of the proposals themselves and the size of the Bill, as well as the inadequate instruction given to him, he was unable to produce a draft in time.
“Recall that the Principal Act, which the proposals seek to amend, took nearly two years to draft and spent two years in a Select Committee.
“You have now a set of proposals presented nearly hours before and there is some expectation to have them drafted into amendments….in drafting of laws, especially with large and complex bills, care and circumspection must be exercised to examine the ramifications and consequences of what is being asked to be inserted into law.
“All of this prevented the draftsperson to present a report to the Committee,” the AG lamented.
He added that the Opposition’s amendments were from A Partnership for National Unity’s (APNU’s) Jaipaul Sharma, Carl Greenidge and Basil Williams.
The changes sought to:
* change the entire governing apparatus of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU);
* remove the Attorney General wherever that name appears and replace it with the FIU and
* vest a Police officer or Customs officer with a power to seize currency from any person, anywhere in Guyana, if those officers have reason to believe that the currency is the proceeds of crime or will be used to finance crime.
Nandlall said the Government members of the Select Committee moved a motion to proceed on the areas that are agreed on but there was no agreement to do so.
Later date
“Ten months now this Bill has been at the Committee and we are saying pass this one through and don’t delay its passage because of proposals made at the last hour; proposals that require a tremendous amount of work and time and can be presented to the House at a later date,” he urged.
The AG bemoaned the impending deadline with the meeting of the Financial Action Task Group (FATF) already drawing near.
The 36 members of the FATF and representatives from the FATF-Style Regional Bodies, which include the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF), began to meet on Sunday.
Some of the issues on the agenda for the plenary session are:
* engaging with the FATF-Style Regional Bodies, through the Global Network Coordination Group, to ensure effective global implementation of the revised FATF Recommendations;
* developing consolidated procedures for mutual evaluations of compliance with the FATF Recommendations, conducted by other assessing bodies;
* reviewing the implementation of measures taken by a number of countries to address deficiencies identified in the last round of mutual evaluation reports;
* identifying jurisdictions with strategic deficiencies in their AML/CFT system and reviewing progress made by jurisdictions that had been identified at the October 2013 Plenary and
* reviewing the options for a possible expansion of membership of the FATF.
Further sanctions
Guyana, according to a statement from FATF at the end of January, listed Guyana as the number one country in the Americas that could be taken on by the International Cooperation Review Group’s (ICRG) for review and possibly further sanctions.
Guyana’s review is expected to come up on Thursday, February 13, hence the sitting of the House yesterday was to have the measure passed before.
The AG made it clear that the Bill, with which the Opposition members of the Select Committee had no problems, also enjoys the support of CFAFT.
Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh commente, as well on the rejection of the motion to have separate considerations of the Opposition’s proposed amendments.
He said:“We have a situation where the APNU has made some recommendations at the eleventh hour and 59th second and the amendments are incoherent and inconsistent, as well as potentially extremely problematic for ordinary Guyanese citizens.
“The amendments deal with the Principal Act and it collides with the Standing Order in that the Special Select Committee cannot deal with amendments to the Principal Act, amendments that are outside the Bill that are before it.
“Importantly, what the Government members are contending is that there is agreement on all the provisions of the Bill, all of them are non-contentious. We can proceed with those and bring ourselves in compliance with CFATF and address the proposals to amend the Principal Act,” he said.
Singh suggested that there could have been a delinking of the issues at hand.
“We can proceed with what we agree on. If we agree on the provisions of the Bill, then we should delink the considerations of the Bill and the proposals to amend the Principal Act,” he proposed.
The Finance Minister criticised the Opposition Committee members for their “adamant” position and refusal to proceed with the delinking of the issues and proceed where there is agreement.
He said:“We adjourned at the point where they used their majority to vote against the delinking of the issues at hand, so we can proceed and it is significant that they voted against proceeding in the areas where there is agreement.”
Written By Vanessa Narine