More stakeholders urge passage of AML/CFT Bill

CHAIRMAN of the Private Sector Commission (PSC), Mr. Ronald Webster emphasised yesterday that the impacts of the non-enactment of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) Bill are real.

“What won’t bite us now will bite later,” he declared at the national consultation on the legislation at the Guyana International Conference Centre (GICC).
Webster, in his remarks, noted that the non-passage of the bill will result in capital flow out of the country, weakening of the currency and higher electricity rates.
He added that in five to six months’ time, the effects of such a setback will affect us tremendously and, as such, we need to avoid this at all cost.
“We must avoid it,” he urged.
According to him, the PSC, over the last few weeks, has spent time meeting with members of the Opposition and other agencies, in an effort to come up with a compromise position.
“At our council meeting last Tuesday, we took the position that we will come out with our statement of what we would like to see. The first thing is we do not support a politically selected Financial Intelligence Unit,” Webster said.

Barbados model
He said the Commission “likes” the Barbados model where the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) reports to an authority and that is drawn from the agencies involved directly or indirectly in managing the problems associated with money laundering and anti-terrorism.
The PSC Chair explained that the Barbados model of the FIU comprises of a Chairperson of the authority who is drawn from University of the West Indies; the deputy chairperson who is drawn from the Private Sector; members of the 11-person commission; the Solicitor General; the Commissioner of Police; the Comptroller of Customs, in Guyana’s case the head of Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA); the supervisor of insurance and the registrars of companies; the Central Bank of Barbados and two additional members who are drawn from the Private Sector who are experts in banking and insurance. There are some permanent members while some are temporal.
One member of the audience, in her remarks, noted that the system of selecting the FIU will have some amount of political influence.
She referred to the University of Guyana (UG) Board where there are representatives of various organisations but when a closer look is taken, it is People’s Progressive Party (PPP) dominated and, as such, the Barbados model is not applicable to Guyana.
The contributor stood in support of the Opposition’s proposed amendments and their position that the FIU Board should be selected by parliamentarians.
President Donald Ramotar, however, in his response revealed that it was made known to him that the CFATF is beginning to have some problems with the Barbados model of the FIU.
He reiterated that the present bill is CFATF compliant and, as such, it should be passed and added that any amendment to that has to be in the framework of CFATF.
Mr. Ramotar expressed his opinion on the selection of the FIU and advocated the removal of political influence on such structure.
Attorney-General and Minister of Legal Affairs Anil Nandlall also offered his views on the proposals for the composition of the FIU that is being put forward.

Important concepts
He echoed the President’s sentiments, pointing out that there are two important concepts that must be maintained, the process of appointment must ensure that there is functional independence and autonomy of FIU which must be free from conflict of interest.

Nandlall also highlighted the Financial Advisor Roger Hernandez’s view that it is highly likely that the proposals put forward by the APNU, where the FIU can be appointed by a politically driven process (National Assembly) is one that may very well render Guyana non-compliant.
He described every Member of Parliament (MP) according to the Act as being politically exposed. As such, he added that there are politically exposed persons who are the subject of the legislation appointing those who will administer its affairs and that is why that formula cannot work, as was previously stated by Hernandez.
“I don’t know by what logic because people are appointed through the Parliament rather than by a Minister, they can function more competently,” the AG stated.
He described that selection process as just an unwarranted proposal and confirmed that it does not form part of the recommendation of CFATF.
“They are problematic,” Nandlall concluded.
Head of the Roraima Group of Companies, Captain Gerry Gouveia also voiced his opinion that, when taken to FATF, they will not be concerned about the domestic challenges of why this bill is not able to pass.
He observed that Trinidad was blacklisted but with their $21billion economy, it wasn’t even a “blick” on their radar.
Gouveia pointed out that Guyana is $3 billion economy, which is very small and these counter measures will collapse it.
He said:“It will affect job creation and it will put us exactly where we were 25 years ago. We will become a burden to the Caribbean.”
Gouveia mentioned the diminishing number of Guyanese who have migrated to other Caribbean countries in search of jobs.
He said the only thing stopping the Bill from being passed is “politics” and he urged the President to continue in his efforts for its passage and reassured the Government that the Private Sector will continue to lend their support for its passing.
Various other stakeholders across Guyana, including the Private Sector Commission (PSC), the National Competitiveness Council (NPC) and religious bodies have been calling for the passage of the bill as Guyana now faces a greater risk of being blacklisted internationally.
On February 28 last, Guyana missed a deadline to submit a report to the Caribbean Financial Action Task force (CFATF), showing that it has been able to correct several deficiencies. This now means that Guyana is in a position where it has not presented to CFATF anything different from what was deliberated on last November, where they said, unless these changes are made to the legislative structure, then they will recommend that Guyana be subjected to a Financial Action Task Force/International Cooperation Group Review.
The Bill has been in limbo for about 11 months with no support from the APNU, which, recently, put forward two proposals, not to the actual bill but to the Principal Act. Those amendments are currently in their drafting stages.

(By Ravin Singh)