Even though Aeshwar Deonarine, Deputy Chief Executive Officer (DCEO) of Guyana Power and Light Inc (GPL) had expressed a willingness to repay $27.8 million that was transferred from the PetroCaribe Fund to his personal bank account, Minister of Public Security Khemraj Ramjattan says charges should be laid.
“Charges ought to be instituted… that is my position,” Ramjattan said.
Earlier Stabroek News had contacted Minister of Public Infrastructure David Patterson but he referred this newspaper to Ramjattan.
Ramjattan informed that a file on the investigations into the transfer has been passed to the Director of Public Prosecutions.
This is a clear indication that moves are being made to determine whether criminal proceedings can be instituted. A senior police official has indicated that no file pertaining to Deonarine has been sent to the CID Headquarters for a probe to be launched. It is unclear at what stage a decision was taken to seek legal advice on a criminal probe as the initial position was that Deonarine would have repaid the money.
According to Ramjattan, based on his last conversation with Patterson, Deonarine had not repaid any of the money. He said Deonarine had asked for time to repay and he did not know if he was given the time as requested, but even if he does repay he should still be charged.
In July, Patterson had made the startling revelation to the media of the transfer. At that time, Deonarine was in charge of administration and he was sent on administrative leave after the transfer was unearthed during a forensic audit of the PetroCaribe Fund.
It was reported that transfer was done with the assistance of labour leader Carvil Duncan, who is a director on GPL’s board and who also paid himself $948,000. The two had managed to make the payments to themselves because they were two of the five signatories on GPL’s bank account. Deonarine made the transfer by way of a bank instruction, which was signed by him and Duncan, while a cheque was made out to Duncan.
Stabroek News has never been able to speak to Deonarine but Duncan in his defence had stressed that he did nothing wrong and alleged collusion by former GPL Chief Executive Officer Bharat Dindyal, whom he said the PPP/C administration had intended to dismiss in June. According to Duncan, Deonarine was tipped to replace Dindyal as CEO and he believed the CEO was targeting Deonarine.
Dindyal, when contacted, had denied this claim and pointed out that he was just following the paper trail and that all the information was with the auditor.
Observers have said that from the inception the transfers should have been the subject of a criminal investigation as a stern warning needed to be sent to persons who had plans to engage in such arrangements. Observers had pointed to the fact that money from the PetroCaribe Fund that was supposed to be used for the benefit of rice farmers was taken by persons who had no connection to the rice industry and who had no business touching or laying claim to that money.
The main concern was whether the duo had the power to pay themselves any money.
Minister Patterson had explained that there are two deputy chief executive officers; Deonarine, who is responsible for administration, and another individual responsible for operations, but the latter was being paid more money because he is on a special contract. Deonarine, he said, had made representation to the board that there should be some sort of parity.
“He has made several representations and on all occasions they have been disapproved by the previous board,” the minister said. However, in June, with the supporting signature of Duncan, Deonarine paid himself representing the retroactive sum for the period January 2013 to June 2015.
In relation to Duncan, the minister said, the board had made representation for members’ fees to be increased from $5,000 to $20,000 a month and while this was discussed at the level of the board no decision was reached. However, in April, Duncan approved the over $900,000 payment to himself representing “back pay for the 48 months he has been on the board.” He was the only director who received the retroactive payment.
Duncan’s explanation when he spoke with this newspaper was that he would sign cheques for the company at the end of the month and that when he would have signed the increase for Deonarine it would not have been an isolated occurrence.
He said he had believed that the board approved the retroactive payment to the deputy CEO and he (Duncan) was paid fees owed to him for some six years since the company had not paid its board members for that period and they were forced to use their own money for transportation and other expenses.
Binding
On the instruction of Deonarine, his lawyer CV Sataram had shared with Stabroek News a letter, dated August 6, 2015 sent to Dindyal. In the letter, it was pointed out that a committee established by the Board had the power to fix the pay of Deonarine. Any such decision was a lawful one, which would have been binding on the company, the attorney posited in the correspondence.
The letter said the dispute which has arisen is concerned mainly with whether the $27.8 million, which represented payment of salary and other benefits, was duly authorised. The letter stated that to determine this question, the governing documents of the company must be examined.
“Part 3.20 of the By-laws of the Guyana Power and Light Inc sets out those decisions of the company which require the approval of shareholders. The remuneration of the executives of the company is not such a decision. Part 3.22 of the By-laws requires that the approval of the shareholders be given in writing with respect to the remuneration of directors. Our client is not and has never been a director of the company. The approval of the prime minister was therefore not required as suggested by you,” it said.
The letter added that “the Board directs the business and affairs of the company including the hiring of officers of the company and the fixing of their remuneration. Under 4.1 of the By-laws the Board was vested with authority to create a Remuneration and Human Resource Committee which it did in fact establish. The committee consists of two (2) persons. Mr Duncan was its Chairman. The said committee was vested with such authority as was delegated to it by the board. It took decisions which are lawfully decisions of the board and which were binding on the company.”
The attorney stressed in the correspondence that it was “well within the powers” of the committee to fix the remuneration for Deonarine. It was stated that Deonarine has instructed that members of the Board did not object to the decision of the subcommittee to increase his salary and benefits.
“You are well aware that since 2010 our client has been a duly authorised signatory to the account out of which the monies were paid. The impression given by your letter seems to be that payments out of the said account were totally unauthorised,” the letter stated before adding that Deonarine has since been instructed by his attorney not to refund “the monies as demanded.”
“Kindly let us know whether you insist on the return of the said monies received by our client. If you do, our client will be compelled to take legal proceedings to have his entitlement to the said monies and the payment thereof declared lawful and just.”
Stabroek News has since attempted to speak with Satram to determine whether there has been a deviation from this position but was unsuccessful.
