Dear Editor,
There are a couple of things this society should to be mindful of in relation to the Anti-money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Bill (AML/CFT).
i) Laws are dead if they are not implemented. There is a principal AML/CFT Act that is yet to see implementation by the government.
ii) The concern the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) has with Guyana is twofold: a) implementation of exiting AML/CFT laws and b) embodying its recommendations in any new law.
iii) Since 2009 CFATF has been working with Guyana to ensure (ii).
iv) CFATF has set Guyana for review in May 2014.
v) In 2013 due to the government’s negligence in implementing laws and embracing recommendations via new laws, CFATF was compelled to put Guyana on a Watch List (black list).
vi) Roger Hernandez, CFATF’s representative, said a) “You require implementation; it is not just passing the law. It is about implementing the law,” and b) “from experience the minimal period for removal is approximately two years.”
vii) It means Guyana will be on CFATF’s list until at least 2015.
viii) Passage of the AML/CFT even in its present state is no automatic guarantee that Guyana will be off the list. To that question posed to Hernandez, his answer was “no.”
ix) During the two years Guyana remains on the Watch List persons and institutions doing business with us would be expected to take the necessary precautions to ensure financial transactions are legitimate and they do not aid any money laundering or financing of terrorism.
x) Persons and institutions who are engaged in legitimate financial transactions may be required to prove so. But this is a price the law-abiding should be prepared to pay in order to rid the society of illegality and the financing of terrorism. Should these acts escalate in our society they pose a potential risk of Guyana and Guyanese being negatively profiled. It is estimated that 40-60 per cent of Guyana’s economy is narco-controlled. This means the society is dealing with a high presence of money laundering.
xi) Some interest in the passage of the Bill sees the potential for having a more involved partnership with Guyana to stamp out money laundering and the financing terrorism and to have the perpetrators held accountable. This can only be possible if the government implements the laws and respects the court’s ruling should persons be found guilty.
xii) This government has a history of non-implementation and disrespect for the court. Some examples are 1) the refusal to respect the 2008 High Court’s ruling in favour of Chapman and Yearwood for a broadcasting licence in Linden; 2) The 1999 Public Service award arising from the Armstrong Arbitration panel; 3) the Herdmanston Accord; 4) the St Lucia Statement; 5) the Hoyte/Jagdeo agreement; 6) the Corbin/Jagdeo communiqué; 7) the August 2012 agreement between central government and Region 10; and 8) government’s June 2012 commitment to the Supreme Court to re-issue letters to start arbitration proceedings in the Bauxite Company of Guyana Incorporated (BCGI) impasse.
xiii) When the private sector is asking the National Assembly to pass the Bill as is, some things are happening here – a) a disrespect for our political system that speaks to an inclusionary democracy based on representation; b) ignorance of our system of governance; c) being the agent of another seeking to manage the nation’s affairs by diktat.
xiv) Those calling for the Bill’s passage are either unaware of or uncaring about the non-implementation of the principal AML/CFT Act which would see this nation being taken down a continuous path that would risk the society staying longer on the Watch List. Clearly, for the CFATF this issue is not only about passing a law, it is about implementation. Refer to (vi).
xv) The bottom line is that Guyana has to implement laws and agreements and honour the court’s decision for the AML/CFT to be effective. When these are not done the country will not be removed from the Watch list.
President Ramotar has to demonstrate to this society he has the capability to manage the country in good faith. And good faith means honouring agreements and having himself and ministers of government respect the laws. The proposals by the opposition and the Guyana Trades Union Congress are just. Had the President resolved these issues they would have been used as testimony by national and regional institutions and citizens for his preparedness to govern consistent with universal and acceptable principles, which are, respecting rights and the rule of law.
Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis
