GBTI CEO, directors acquitted
GBTI officials as they exited the court on Monday
GBTI officials as they exited the court on Monday

-prosecution failed to present satisfactory evidence to court

TWO years after they were charged for failing to comply with a production order, directors of the Guyana Bank for Trade and Industry (GBTI) were acquitted by Chief Magistrate Ann Mc Lennan on Monday (March 19, 2019) at the Georgetown Magistrates’ Court.

The officials were charged on October 23, 2017, for failing to comply with a production order issued by Chief Justice (ag) Ms. Roxane George-Wiltshire. The order to produce certain documents within seven days was made on August 29, 2017; the documents were needed in relation to the Special Organised Crime Unit’s (SOCU) investigation into an alleged US $500M fraud at the Guyana Rice Development Board (GRDB).

With detailed reference to the anti-money laundering laws, once a court order is made, the delivery of information requested from a financial institution is mandatory. The monies in this case are not private funds, but belong to a state agency, the GRDB.

The defendants, Robin Stoby S.C, who was chairman of the GBTI board, along with Directors Suresh Beharry, Richard Isava, Carlton James, Basil Mahadeo, Edward Beharry, Kathryn Eytle-McLean and Chief Executive Officer Shaleeza Shaw, had all pleaded not guilty to the charge back in 2017.

According to the facts of the case, the GBTI was granted an extension of three weeks to present its documents. Upon failure to so do, GBTI was, at the time, accused of withholding all relevant documents pertaining to the case.

After several hearings were held during the period October, 2017 to January, 2019, the magistrate came to a definitive ruling. She stated that the prosecution, headed by SOCU Prosecutor Patrice Henry, failed to prove that the time to produce the documents had expired, as well as evidence to support the fact that both tenured and non-tenured documents were submitted.

As such, no further opportunities were given to the prosecution to present its case and the magistrate asserted that the court could not speculate about the elements of the offence, as they could not be proved.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp
All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.