After a heated debate followed by a vote, the opposition succeeded in sending the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (Amendment) Bill to a Special Select Committee on Tuesday prior to Parliament adjourning.
The government lamented that the opposition chose to ignore the looming sanctions by the international community if Guyana were not to bring the bill, which has sweeping reforms, into law by the May 27 deadline.
But Alliance For Change MP Moses Nagamootoo stated that Guyana was not about to be crippled internally by proposed sanctions and that the amendment to the AML/CFT Act needed proper revision. Sounding his support of the motion to send the bill to the special select committee, Nagamootoo said neither international sanction nor the threat of sanction should be the reason for haste to do certain things.
The AFC MP said the AML/CFT Bill was not a stand-alone as it had ramifications for several other acts citing the Gambling, Money Transfer Agency and Insurance acts. Nagamootoo said that mutual assistance in criminal matters, security issues and foreign exchange policies would also need to be considered as the AML/CFT “impinges” on various sectors in society.
He noted that since the 2009 assent of the principal act, there had not been the prosecution of a single case involving money laundering under the AML/CFT Act.
“We waited four years; we haven’t prosecuted anyone for terrorism and financing terrorism. It is not the weakness of the legislation, it is a lack of political will and we cannot be short-changed in this house,” Nagamootoo said. “A lack of political courage should not be substituted by expediency to tinker with our legislation to appeal to international exigencies,” he added.
The AFC MP noted that both sides of the house were aware of the time constraints and the AFC was committed to work with the government to expedite discussions and to meet to continue the debate on May 22.
After APNU MP Basil Williams repeatedly stated that the opposition’s stance was to move the bill to the Special Select Committee, Attorney General Anil Nandlall urged the house to reconsider. Nandlall said Guyana, as signatory, to both the Vienna Convention and the Terrorist Financing Conventions would be held responsible to adhering to recommendations of the Caribbean Financial Action Taskforce (CFAT).
This body, which is responsible for monitoring the operations of these types of legislation throughout the region, had reviewed the practices across all 29 countries under its jurisdiction and made relevant recommendations.
“Our obligation of these conventions are also monitored by the United Nations and for all the evidence that I have seen and from the discussions which I have had with the experts that came to Guyana to speak to us about these amendments in Guyana serious sanctions can flow to Guyana as a country if we do not comply with these obligations,” in a timely manner, Nandlall told the National Assembly. “When bills go to the select committee no matter what dispatch we may undertake or endeavour to attach to it, no matter what expedient endeavour, the reality is that there is a protracted delay at select committee,” he added. He warned that the Guyanese people would be penalised in the long run.
Posturing
Presidential Advisor on Governance Gail Teixeira echoed the views of the AG stating that the opposition was behaving as if it had been excluded from the original discussion. Teixeira stated that the opposition was called upon by the American, British and Canadian diplomats in the crafting of the legislation noting that both the government and the opposition were made aware of the May 27 deadline. Teixeira said the May 22 debate would not adhere to the Standing Orders that there needed to be a six-day grace period for the President to assent to the bill. She said the House has dealt with far more complex bills in the past and this was political posturing on the opposition’s part.
But members of the opposition were not swayed. APNU’s Williams said, “We cannot short-change the people of Guyana this is a very complex bill”.
Teixeira argued that the opposition had two weeks to familiarise themselves with the bill since it was first read.
The amendments once passed will see an increase in the minimum fine upon conviction for certain money laundering offences from $1 million to $5 million; the insertion of a new section to provide for the freezing of funds of terrorists and terrorist groups or organisations and widening the scope of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) to request information from telecoms providers.
The amendments also seek to expand due diligence obligations of reporting entities. One of the amendments would provide for reporting entities not to open new accounts or conduct business when they are unable to obtain satisfactory evidence of the identity of the intended customer and to consider making a suspicious transaction report. And, where a customer becomes “politically exposed”—either directly as a functionary of the government, state, judiciary, military, important political party, or indirectly as a family member or close associate of such a functionary—the senior management of a reporting entity would have to green-light continued business relations.
The schedule to the bill also makes provisions for amendments to the Gambling Prevention Act; the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act; the Securities Industries Act; the Money Transfer Agencies Licencing Act; the Foreign Exchange (Miscellaneous Provisions Act); the Co-operatives Societies Act; the Companies Act; and the Insurance Act.
