Dear Editor,
Recently, a person on Facebook asked two questions of me:
(a) Who is responsible for Guyana being blacklisted by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF)?
(b) Why is Guyana still on this list even though Guyana enacted an AML/CFT Bill in June, 2015?
I set hereunder my answer.
In November, 2011, Guyana was identified by CFATF as a jurisdiction “with significant strategic deficiencies” in its AML/CFT Regime. As a result, CFATF developed an action plan with identified target dates to address the strategic deficiencies that exist in Guyana’s national architecture to combat money laundering and financing of terrorism.
During the month of April, 2012, I laid an AML/CFT (Amendment) Bill before the National Assembly. At the debate stage, I emphasized its importance in great detail. I outlined the consequences which will flow if this bill was not enacted. My colleagues in government did the same both in and out of the National Assembly. Our pleas fell on deaf ears. The APNU and AFC, using their one-seat majority, sent it to a select committee. They claimed that they have amendments to make. The Bill spent over six months in the select committee. No amendments were proposed. When the Bill was returned to the National Assembly, the APNU and AFC used their majority and voted it down.
As a result, in November, 2013, CFATF found that Guyana did not implement its action plan adequately; in particular, that Guyana failed to approve and implement the required legislative reforms. Guyana was mandated to pass the relevant legislation to address certain identified deficiencies. Countries were called upon “to consider implementing counter-measures to protect their financial systems from ongoing money laundering and terrorist financing risks emanating from Guyana”.
In December, 2013, I tabled another AML/CFT (Amendment) Bill in the National Assembly. Again, its importance was emphasized. Again, the perils to which Guyana and its citizens would be exposed were highlighted. Again, it fell on deaf ears. Again, the APNU and AFC used their majority in the National Assembly and sent the bill to the select committee. Again, it was kept there for another six months. At the last moment, amendments were proposed. The amendments were sent to CFATF. The select committee was told both in writing and in person by Roger Hernandez of CFATF that the amendments were not appropriate and that they will pose problems for Guyana. This advice was ignored. In the meanwhile, the diplomatic community, the religious community, the labour movement and the private sector, all called upon the opposition to pass a CFATF Compliant Bill. These calls fell on deaf ears. When the bill was returned to the House, it was again voted down. An offer was made by President Donald Ramotar that the government would support a bill containing the opposition’s amendments. Even this was rejected. In short, the opposition rejected their own amendments!
As a result, in May, 2014, again CFATF found that Guyana failed to make significant progress in addressing those deficiencies and in its public statement on Guyana, said “CFATF considers Guyana to be a risk to the international financial system. Members are therefore called upon to implement further counter measures to protect their financial systems from the ongoing money laundering and terrorist financing risks emanating from Guyana. Also, the CFATF has referred Guyana to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).”
In common parlance, Guyana was essentially blacklisted by CFATF because the APNU and AFC used their majority to prevent the government from passing the relevant legislation.
Why is Guyana still on this list even though Guyana enacted an AML/CFT Bill in June, 2015?
FATF at its November, 2014 meeting in Paris, France, referred Guyana to the Review Group of the Americas for this group to work with Guyana to rectify its legislative deficiencies. I assembled a unit within the Attorney General Chambers comprising myself, two lawyers, a draftsman and the Head of the Financial Intelligence Unit and its legal advisor. Our interactions with the Review Group consisted of face-to-face meetings, conference calls and most importantly, a mechanism whereby every legislative requirement which Guyana is expected to meet was reduced into clauses to be inserted in the bill and each clause was sent by email to the Review Group for examination and not until it was approved, was it included in the bill. Accordingly, at the end of the process, the bill that was produced was essentially a bill already approved by the examiner. Up to the time when I left office, we had a complete draft bill with accompanying regulations, both of which received the approval of the Review Group via this mechanism. How then, did FATF in November, 2015, find that Guyana is still afflicted with “strategic AML/CFT deficiencies?”
The answer is simple. The Attorney General inserted into the bill the amendments which the APNU+AFC proposed, while they were in opposition and he did not employ the procedure of seeking the prior approval of the Review Group as I outlined above, although I advised him to do so when I handed over to him. I hope that ego will yield to reason before May, 2016, when Guyana is scheduled for another evaluation by FATF.
Yours faithfully,
Mohabir Anil Nandlall, MP
