-Director, Deputy and staff fired

THE Government, on Tuesday, dismantled the operations of the State Asset Recovery Agency (SARA) and terminated the services of the Director, Professor Clive Thomas, and his deputy, Aubrey Heath-Retemyer (Major ret’d), with immediate effect, citing a breach of the State Assets Recovery Act of 2017.
The Government also terminated the employment of some 41 employees with immediate effect.

A statement from the Chambers of the Attorney General and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall, noted that Thomas and Retemyer appointed “themselves and determined their term of office, in complete disregard and violation of the provisions set out in the Act.”
“This Agency has achieved nothing in five years, but has ‘gobbled up’ close to $1B GYD in public funds in salaries, wages, rent and operational expenses,” Nandlall noted.
An action was filed in the High Court challenging their appointment and that action is also pending, Nandlall’s Chambers noted. Documents released by the Attorney General showed that the two men ‘hired each other’, thus breaching the Act.

In outlining the sections of the Act that were breached, the Attorney General revealed the following: in relation to the appointment of the Director and Deputy Director the Schedule states in Section (1) that the National Assembly shall –
(a) by a simple majority; and
(b) on the recommendation of the Parliamentary Committee on Appointments, appoint the Director and Deputy Director of the State Assets Recovery Agency.
Further, in Section 1 (4) of the Schedule it is stated that the Director and Deputy Director shall be informed of their appointments by the Clerk of the National Assembly:

(4) The Clerk of the National Assembly shall, by letter, inform the Director and the Deputy Director of their appointment. Moreover, the terms and conditions of the appointment of the Director and Deputy Director are provided for by Section 2 of the Schedule which is set out hereunder for reference:

2 (1) The terms and conditions of the appointment of the Director and Deputy Director, including their term of office shall be such as determined by the Parliamentary Committee on Appointments.

“The Government of Guyana wishes to thank you for your services and hereby assures you that your curriculum vitae will be kept on record for consideration for future employment,” a letter signed by the Attorney General stated to both men.

Both Thomas and Heath-Retemyer entered into a five-year contract with the former APNU+AFC Government on September 1, 2017. Details of the contract, which was released by the Attorney General, reveal that Thomas was being paid a monthly salary of G$1M, G$30,000 travelling allowance per month, a G$50,000 risk allowance per month; the Government paid for security and electricity at his place of residence, cell phone and landline bills, internet access at his residence and provided medical and life insurance.
As it relates to Heath-Retemyer, his salary was G$700,000 per month and he was given the same benefits as his Director.

The Attorney General, in his statement, reminded that one of Guyana’s largest financial institutions, the Guyana Bank for Trade and Industry (GBTI) “was assailed by SARA, who instituted proceedings to acquire the Headquarters of GBTI located on High and Young Street Kingston in the High Court.”
According to Minister Nandlall, the land was acquired by GBTI by public tendering process over a decade ago.

“GBTI after acquisition of the land subsequently constructed its Headquarters amounting to an expenditure of several hundred million Guyana dollars. The Honourable Justice Franklyn Holder ruled that SARA was not a corporate entity and as such it could not sue or be sued by such a name. The judge found that since the commencement of the Act, no director has ever been appointed and none by construction of the provisions of the Act.

“The Court ruled that only a director, a duly authorized officer, was empowered by Section 40 of the Act to institute proceedings of the nature sought to acquire the land from GBTI. Although, the court raised the issue of an authorized officer as described in Section 2 of the Act having the capacity to institute proceedings such as the one against GBTI, counsel for SARA did not seek an Order to substitute a possible authorized officer with the description of Section 2 of the Act. The case was struck out,” the Attorney General said.
He further noted that every other action filed by SARA was bound to fail due to the defect identified by the Court.

“The Government will undertake to strengthen asset recovery components of the AMLCFT legislation and will endeavour to enact legislation utilising the CARICOM model of State Asset Recovery, in respect of state assets acquired illegally. This model legislation is in consonance with our laws and the Constitution,” Nandlall said.