Now former Commissio-ner-General of the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) Khurshid Sattaur was let go after he admitted to having breached his oath of office by releasing private taxpayer data, according to Chairman of the GRA Board Rawle Lucas, who said it was among several discoveries that were made.
Sattaur, however, denied the claim and others yesterday, although he did admit to releasing information to a foreign mission on a diplomat. Sattaur also said he was “extremely disturbed” by what he labelled as “allegations” and indicated that he was contemplating taking legal action.
At a press conference held at GRA headquarters, one day after the Board announced the unanimous decision to sever ties with Sattaur effective from March 1, Lucas said that he had “admitted to the Board that he breached his oath of office.” He explained that the Board learned that “approximately one month before the May, 2015 elections, Mr Sattaur divulged sensitive information of a Guyanese taxpayer to a person not authorised to receive such information.” This transaction, the Board concluded, had no benefit to the people of Guyana and only benefitted Sattaur.
In a statement released hours after, Sattaur denied the admission. “Those are all fabrications that I find most offensive and atrocious. This is most disgusting as I never admitted to the Board that I gave out taxpayer information,” he said.
However, he did acknowledge that he told the Board that he gave information to a Diplomatic Head of Mission with information sought, given that it was a diplomat’s information and not that of a taxpayer.
“I do not agree that for the reasons given above that I admitted to the Board that I divulged taxpayers’ information. The information was to facilitate an audit by the embassy of its records and done in the best interest of safeguarding the integrity of the GRA system. It was also done to validate information received from a third party as we routinely do at GRA as part of their routine work when granting large amount of tax concessions according to the GRA’s [Standard Operating Procedures],” he added.
According to Sattaur, the Head of the Mission wanted to know about the staff member, whom he said was providing businesses with certification that were fraudulently obtained.
He also said that he was put on the spot by the GRA Board and did not have an opportunity to explain the background.
He said that a month prior to the May 11, 2015 general elections, a diplomat asked him to facilitate a probe that the foreign government had been conducting into one of its staff members. “One of their staff is not a taxpayer of this country. That staff member had allegedly breached a very serious protocol and had given the GRA information on someone which should not have been the case and as such the diplomat was asked by his government to investigate the matter,” he said.
Sattaur suggested that a “very senior GRA staff member,” whom he claimed he deliberately took to the discussion with the diplomat to serve as a witness, may have reported the interaction either to the Board or the Minister of Finance Winston Jordan. “This particular individual… whom I took deliberately to be a witness to what I was discussing with the diplomat, would have appeared to have misled the Board or the politician,” he said, while further suggesting that the individual acted in retaliation for being suspended for the falsification of documents.
Safe
Meanwhile, Lucas also detailed other discoveries that led to the Board’s decision, including the fact Sattaur had at his home a safe normally used for storing confidential taxpayer data.
According to Lucas, Sattaur claimed that this safe, which was to be under the control of the head of GRA’s Information Technology Division, was at his home because “his son was an IT operative.”
In his statement, Sattaur said his son was employed in a senior capacity in the GRA’s IT department and he had been given responsibility for storing the agency’s data at another safe place offsite as a temporary measure. He noted that the previous Board and government did not find the situation offensive and distrustful.
“However this storage of the data at my home was abandoned about five years ago. My home or the safe was no longer the repository of that information. I categorically state that the safe never had any data, I wish to state further that the infrastructure related to the backing up of the data has since been removed under the directive of the new GRA Board,” he noted.
He added that the use of the safe was discontinued years ago when a new back up site was created at another location but it remained at his home to store his GRA weapon and ammunition up until recently.
Lucas said the agency also found within Sattaur’s possession two additional vehicles belonging to GRA. Six vehicles, including a golf cart, were previously found, and four were repossessed by the GRA.
Of the two vehicles most recently found, Lucas said Sattaur identified one as a gift to the agency, although he could not at first “remember” from whom and under what circumstances it was gifted. He also could not explain how the “gifted” vehicle was able to bear the same licence plate as another GRA vehicle at the same time in a clear violation of the country’s traffic laws.
He added that Sattaur also could not explain how or why a vehicle registered to GRA was being driven by someone not permitted to do so.
Backdated pension
Questions also arose when efforts were made to ascertain the terms of employment under which the former Commissioner-General held the post. Lucas revealed that Sattaur, who was first appointed to head GRA in 2003, exercised the option for voluntary retirement at the end of October, 2011 and had been receiving a pension for the last four years.
“The Board thus sought to ascertain the basis on which Mr. Sattaur was able to continue serving as the Commissioner-General and to be represented to the people of Guyana as being on its fixed establishment,” Lucas said. He noted that while their enquiries revealed that he could have continued to serve after October, 2011, on the basis of a contract between him and the Board, they could not find “any evidence of the contract.”
There is evidence that Sattaur did undertake tasks consistent with the position of Commissioner-General and the Legal Department has advised that an “implied contract” may exist.
According to Lucas, another troubling discovery was that Sattaur backdated to 2007 his participation in the GRA pension programme.
This decision which was also effected one month before the 2015 elections and cost the government of Guyana $12M.
When asked to examine this action, the Legal Department could find “no rational or supportive legal basis” for the decision, which the Board found to be “inimical to public interest,” Lucas said.
Addressing the backdating of his pension plan to 2007, when he retired in 2011, Sattaur, in his statement, said he was advised by attorney Ashton Chase, SC, that he was entitled to the benefits under the GRA’s contributory pension scheme. He said the GRA’s Human Resources and Legal departments could verify the claim.
“Further this benefit was due to me from 2007 after I found out that I was entitled to those benefits .The reason why I was not claiming these benefits before is that the HR department never told me that I was entitled, even though other persons were receiving it. After I got the approval from the HR department I went ahead and claimed my benefits. Ms. [Sonia] Roopnauth, the Director of Budget can attest to this. If this is so wrong why was the monies approved for payment?” he questioned.
Lucas said although GRA cannot deny Sattaur his benefits, the discovered irregularities will be pursued through the appropriate channels.
