THE Parliamentary Select Committee reviewing the Anti-Money Laundering/Countering the Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill met yesterday, but there remains a disagreement on the role of the Committee between Government and Opposition members.The Committee has consensually completed its consideration of the provisions in the Bill, but the Opposition made proposals for three additional amendments to the Principal Act.
The amendments seek 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.
To this end, the Committee was unable to conclude its work as the Opposition members used their majority to vote that the Bill will not be finalised until the amendments are included.
The Government members maintain that the Opposition’s proposed amendments deal with the Principal Act and, as such, collide with the Standing Order because they are outside of the Bill before it.
Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall, told the Guyana Chronicle that Standing Order 95:3 is clear, but irrespective of this the “Opposition is ploughing” ahead.
He made it clear that this matter has not been resolved.
MUST BE UPHELD
Chair of the Committee, Gail Teixeira, told the Guyana Chronicle that the Standing Order that defines the remit of the work must be upheld.
The Standing Order 95:3 says, “The business to be transacted at every meeting of a Committee shall be confined to the matter referred to it by the Assembly and any extension or limitations thereof made by the Assembly, and in the case of a Select Committee on a Bill committed to it and relevant amendments.”
The Committee Chair pointed out that the Opposition “fought” to have a majority on the Committee.
“Because of the time the proposals for amendments were made, at the last meeting what we had from the Parliamentary Counsel was a rough draft,” she explained.
A Partnership for National Unity’s (APNU) member, Carl Greenidge, told this newspaper that his understanding of the standing orders is different from the contention of the Government members.
He said, “That is not my understanding of the standing orders and for an Act to be consistent you have to look at all the elements… a law is a complete document and the Bill has to be a complete document.”
The outcome of today’s meeting remains to be seen, as Guyana faces a new deadline by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF).
Written By Vanessa Narine