The Anti-Money Laundering Bill was passed with the full support of the National Assembly on Thursday night having spent almost two years in a Special Select Committee.
The Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill tabled in June, 2007 provides for oversight of the export and insurance industries, real estate, and alternative remittance systems, and sets forth the penalties for non-compliance. It also establishes the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) as an independent body that answers only to the President, and defines in detail its role and powers. The Bill is believed to be a significant improvement on previous anti-money laundering legislation and covers, among other things, the freezing and forfeiture of assets owned or controlled by persons suspected of engaging in money laundering activities.
It was fully supported by speakers on both sides of the House with Finance Minister, Dr Ashni Singh stating that it is among the more modern pieces of money laundering legislation in the Caribbean. He said that it has a number of important features including the financial intelligence authority. He said that the bill also protects legitimate third parties. The Finance Minister stated that the Bill goes beyond the traditional pool of licensed financial institutions such as banks and provides for reporting entities to cover not only traditional licensed financial institutions but also insurance companies, money transfer agencies, cambios and credit unions among others. He noted that the Bill also provides for the establishment of supervisory authority over the various sectors where it might not currently exist. Dr Singh declared that it is a formidable piece of legislation and had been in the public domain for an adequate length of time, and benefitted considerably from the work of the committee.
Meantime, noting the PNCR-1G support for the Bill, PNCR-1G Member of Parliament, Winston Murray pointed out that 24 clauses were amended in the committee stage and a new clause was introduced to minimize bureaucracy. He declared that he had no apologies to make for the time taken to deal with the Bill and bring it before the National Assembly as it was of a complex nature and required time. He noted that much of the contents of the Bill may be considered draconian and in such a Bill, care has to be taken to balance the right of a citizen vis-a-vis the need to apprehend money launderers and financiers of terrorism and going after their assets.
The parliamentarian said a lot of time had been spent “agonizing” over what was the best procedure but ultimately they ensured that due process was strengthened. He referred too to a concept in the Bill, “unknown to any of our laws at present” – the Politically Exposed Person, who is someone entrusted with prominent public functions on behalf of a State including a Head of State, senior politicians among others including family members and close associates. Such persons are going to be subjects of the Bill when it becomes law.
Murray, however, said that there were some concerns about the appointment of the Director and staff of the FIU, which power resides in the Finance Minister as it could raise questions about the independence of the Unit. The power to remove the Director lies in the President. He said that the appointment of the FIU Director should be done as independently as possible. The parliamentarian stated too that not much was done to give effect to the previous anti money-laundering Act which was passed in 2000. He declared that the necessary human and financial resources must be given to the Unit to allow it to administrate the law effectively. Murray, an economist, raised the issue too of the qualifications of the Director noting that in the Bill a person who has expertise and experience in legal, financial or administrative matters can be appointed.
He questioned whether the ‘administrative’ qualification may be enough.
AFC leader Raphael Trotman said that he hoped that the Bill would not go the way of the Insurance Act. Home Affairs Minister, Clement Rohee declared that he hoped that the Bill will put to rest, allegations of members of the administration being in bed with money launderers and drug lords. PPP MP Anil Nandlall also spoke on the Bill.
In wrapping up, Dr. Singh said that he does not hold the view that the 2000 Act was not implemented. He also defended the Insurance Act asserting that it was extensively implemented. The way the CLICO matter in Guyana transpired, he said, did not differ from the way it transpired in other parts of the Caribbean. He stated that the Bill marks a landmark achievement and “lays the basis for an effective fight against the scourge of money laundering”.
The Bill will come into force after it is assented to by the President. It provides for unlawful proceeds of all serious offences to be identified, traced, frozen, and forfeited. It also provides for comprehensive powers for the prosecution of money laundering, terrorist financing, and other financial crimes and the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime and terrorist property. Included in the Bill are provisions requiring reporting entities to take preventative measures to help combat money laundering and terrorist financing and it also provides for the civil forfeiture of assets and “for matters connected therewith”.
Clause 110 of the Bill states that as soon as practicable but not later than six months after the expiry of the financial year, the Director (of the FIU) shall submit to the Minister responsible for Finance, an annual report by the FIU for that financial year. It says that the report shall comprise information on the financial affairs, operations and performance of the FIU including the amounts paid into the Consolidated Fund under the Act. The Minister responsible for Finance shall cause a copy of the report together with the annual statements of accounts and the Auditor’s General report to be laid before the National Assembly, within one month of receiving it.
The first meeting of the committee was held on July 12th, 2007 while the second was held on June 11th, 2008. Meetings were held regularly thereafter.
