Former Crime Chief Henry Chester found the police file on the $69 million fraud at the NBS in 2006 so grossly deficient that he queried whether the correct file had been submitted to the Ombudsman for the latter’s investigation of a complaint made in January by former Chief Executive Officer Maurice Arjoon.
Chester’s investigation of the file at the behest of Ombudsman Justice Winston Moore also alighted on the special role played by the Central Islamic Organisation of Guyana (CIOG) in the discovery and pursuit of the fraud.
Instead of immediately pursuing the multimillion fraud with the New Building Society (NBS) management, Zainool Khan Safi, the husband of the account holder, proceeded to the CIOG to make his concerns known. Based on what the police file said, only a junior staff member was aware of the missing money initially and it is unclear whether it was reported to senior members of the institution.
CIOG Head Shaikh Moeen ul-Hack then made contact with Assistant Secretary of NBS Nizam Mohamed indicating that there was an unauthorized withdrawal of $32 million from Safi’s wife’s account. It was subsequently discovered that the amount withdrawn was actually $69 million.
After receiving the call, Mohamed attended a meeting at the CIOG headquarters at which Safi, the husband of account holder Bibi Shamila Khan, was present along with ul-Hack and his wife Shalimar Ali-Hack, who is the Director of Public Prosecutions. The presence of Ali-Hack at this meeting would have raised questions as she was later to advise the police to charge three senior managers, including Arjoon, with conspiracy to commit fraud.
Arjoon, assistant Mortgage Manager Kissoon Baldeo and Operations Manager Kent Vincent along with employees Imran Khan and Amrita Prashad together with Ashley Legall and Mohanram Shahebudin were charged in connection with the fraud. After years of delay and the non-appearance of the account holder to complete her testimony all the charges were dismissed.
Based on Chester’s findings and other investigations, the Ombudsman ruled earlier this month that a grave injustice had been done against Arjoon and the two managers in the preferment of the charges as there was no evidence presented in the police file that warranted such.
Stabroek News made contact with ul-Hack on Thursday last and asked for a comment on his role in the matter as well as what has been said about the CIOG in the Ombudsman’s final report. He said he could not comment at that moment as he was otherwise engaged. Asked if contact could be made with him the following day he said that was not possible as he had religious engagements. “When it is convenient to me I will prepare my statement and send it to you,” he said.
Chester, who retired at the rank of Assistant Commissioner and was one of the force’s senior investigators, said there was nothing in the police file to indicate that other persons were prosecuted, apart from the former senior managers.
He also pointed out that there was nothing in the file on the arrest, interrogation and cautioning of the mastermind Ashley Legall also known as Compton Chase. There was nothing in the file, he said, to indicate that any search warrant was executed upon any premises of anyone in relation to a fraud.
“One must ask oneself if this is the correct file submitted to the Ombudsman by the Police Re – NBS Fraud. Several things are unusual and not explored in this file, from a police investigation which took four months before charges were laid,” Chester said.
He listed 17 things which he found to be unusual.
The first was that there was a striking similarity of all the signatures of Bibi Shamila Khan.
The second was that 2 handwriting specimens were taken from Bibi Shamila Khan, along with that from her signed statement.
The third was that Bibi Shamila Khan had presented her cancelled passport to NBS on 03-01-07, when she had a current passport.
The fourth was that no request was made to the Jamaican police for a record of Bibi Shamila Khan’s movements in and out of that country.
The fifth and sixth were that no request was made to the Canadian police for a record of Bibi Shamila Khan’s movements in and out of that country and there was also no follow-up for additional information (seen in file) as requested by Interpol Canada.
The seventh and eighth were that there was no acknowledgement from Inspector Charles that he received two exhibits for handwriting analysis; there was also no follow-up on Inspector Charles’ request for original faxes to be submitted after his inconclusive first examination of the exhibits.
Chester questioned why the police did not recommend charges in any of their reports. Also, he said, there was no minute in the file with any recommended charges to the DPP from Assistant Commissioner Law Enforcement (ACLE).
The eleventh irregularity was that under the ‘Index of statement’ and ‘Exhibits’ in the file, there were: no listing of the name of the witness Vishrakand Narine; no listing of several exhibits and the first listing “eleven pages of notes at Minister meeting” was missing.
Chester questioned what role ul-Hack played in the investigation, adding that there was no statement from him.
The thirteenth unusual thing was that the first minute in the ‘Police’ file was dated 02-02-07 and was from the DPP to ACLE, the second was dated 05-02-07 and the third 14-02-07.
He questioned why the DPP gave such short dates for the police to respond to her advice and further what role she had played in the meeting which took place at the CIOG on Saturday 20, January, 2007.
The sixteenth thing was that the first police minutes in the file was dated 16-04-07 from Detective Inspector Wintz to the officer in charge (O/C) of the Fraud Squad; then from O/C Fraud to the ACLE dated the same day and from the ACLE to the DPP, also dated the same day.
The seventeenth thing that he drew attention to was that the last minutes seen before charges were laid was from the ACLE to the DPP dated 31- 05-07 seeking advice; the response from the DPP to the ACLE was dated the same day and recommended that charges be laid.
Cambios
In his report, Chester also included details as listed in the police file about the encashment of cheques from NBS at Swiss House and the L Mohabeer and Sons cambios.
It was stated that during the conduct of the police investigation, Baldeo had reported to Arjoon that on Wednesday 7, March 2007, while walking in America Street he was approached by Maulderlall Kryshundayal and asked about “the fraud at NBS”.
Kryshundayal said he once worked at Swiss House Cambio and one of the cheques was payable to him. He fingered lmran Bacchus as the person who had collected the foreign currency equivalent of the cheque he had encashed and which was handed over to his boss Farouk Razac. From closed circuit television monitors in Arjoon’s office Kryshundayal had identified Bacchus.
In Kryshundayal’s statement which he had given to the police on Friday 2, February 2007, he said that he was employed at Swiss House Cambio as a teller. His functions included collecting from and delivering cash to customers. He also encashed cheques written in his name on behalf of his employer.
He recalled during the month of November 2006, a NBS cheque was written in his name, but he could not remember the amount. The cash was delivered to Razac. He could not have said who brought the cheque or what was the transaction. Given what had transpired in Arjoon’s office, police failed to locate Kryshundayal.
Razac, the then owner of Swiss House Cambio (now deceased) did name among his employees Mohamed Hussain and Kryshundayal in whose names cheques related to Bibi Shamila Khan’s transactions were written. He had said that he would usually receive calls from several customers and banks including NBS for US currency.
Razac recalled instances where, during the period under investigation, he had received calls with requests for large sums of US currency and he had facilitated by having cheques written in his employees’ names, which were cashed and either converted or paid local currency. Chase was positively identified as one of the persons who had used the facility.
According to Chester, it is his opinion that the three managers acted “appropriately in the discharge of their duties”. He said they had followed the rules and procedures of NBS.
“However, the error made was accepting the Canadian telephone number supplied by Compton Chase, to the young and inexperienced employee Amrita Prashad. This nonetheless does not make their action criminal,” he said adding that there was not a “thread of evidence in this file to prove that those senior officials, who were entrusted with property not their own, dealt wrongfully with it, which would have established the intent.”
He had recommended that that the police forward all the files with exhibits to the Ombudsman for further study and follow-up action and that Arjoon be advised to take private action as a form of redress.
Moore in his final report completed a few weeks ago found among other things that the trio suffered a “grave injustice.”
Arjoon, in his complaint, alleged that former president Bharrat Jagdeo, present Minister of Labour Dr Nanda Gopaul, Finance Minister Dr Ashni Singh and Ali-Hack all had a hand in the injustice he suffered. Therefore, Moore said, he had jurisdiction to probe the complaint.
Gopaul was the first person to challenge the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction in the matter.
“Importantly, the learned Ombudsman does not have the mandate and jurisdiction to review the decision of a private company to dismiss its employees. The fact that the company was not even consulted simply compounds the wrong,” Gopaul declared in a press release.
The DPP meanwhile has held fast to the position that there was “strong and compelling evidence” in the police file to institute charges against the trio.
The Ombudsman has since defended his finding and challenged his detractors to show where he had acted unfairly. He said too that while he sent a copy of the report and indicated that he should be informed by way of letter whatever concerns they may have about the content, he is yet to receive a response. He took note that instead some of the parties of the matter took to the media to air their grievances.
