Anytime a senior member of the police force is facing allegations of the type that have beset Assistant Commissioner of Police, Calvin Brutus, the country has a major problem on its hands as it relates to law enforcement. To navigate this thicket of gorse it may be useful to examine the major claims of the two sides.
In its affidavit to the court seeking to block Mr Brutus’ departure to the US, the state asserted that there are 240 charges pending against him for money laundering and other serious financial crimes.
Among the disclosures in the affidavit in response to Mr Brutus’s application to travel was that the State through a High Court order had frozen some nine accounts held at Republic Bank (Guyana) Limited, Demerara Bank Limited (DBL) and the New Building Society in the names of Mr Brutus, his wife and their minor son. Combined, those accounts held $500 million accumulated over a period of one year.
In a bid to establish Mr Brutus’ financial capacity despite his accounts being frozen, his attorney Earl Daniels told the court that Mr Brutus possessed many assets in Guyana, including properties. This plenitude had arisen before in Mr Brutus’ original statement to the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU) when he sought to explain large deposits to Demerara Bank Limited in January this year following his wedding in November last year and the Christmas season that followed.
In his statement of May 14th this year to SOCU, Mr Brutus told investigators that he deposited $46.4m on the 17th of January this year which were proceeds from his wedding on November 11th last year and Christmas gifts.
In the earlier part of his statement, he spoke about the culture of gift giving.
“During the twenty five…years tenure , I have developed many friendships with people of all walks of life and maintained such relationships. These relationships have helped greatly during the execution of my duties as a law enforcement official and (in a) private capacity too. I have received many personal gifts before becoming a policeman and throughout my tenure, and I (understand) this to be a cultural phenomenon in Guyana”, he said.
He also addressed the range of benefits available. He said that he resided in a government building and did not have to expend personal finances on rent and utilities.
His current position includes a police vehicle and driver, a maid, one security person on a 24-hour shift system, meals, medical benefits, a post-paid cellular plan and allowances from the police credit union, the Guyana Police Cooperative Consumers Society and the Special Constabulary Board etc.
“Essentially, there is hardly any requirement for me to spend the money received as salary and emoluments, there it is save(d) in (my) Demerara Bank Account”, he said.
With the hard scrabble life that many public servants live, Mr Brutus’ account of his financial standing would certainly jar and not surprisingly led to an investigation. This is where things get even more interesting.
On May 14, 2024 at about 8 am Mr Brutus said that he was contacted by Assistant Superintendent Roopnarine of SOCU and informed about the allegation of money laundering made by the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). Why had it taken around five months from the deposit in January for a probe to be initiated?
“I told Assistant Superintendent Roopnarine that the persons (relatives and friends) would be willing to assist him in the investigation by giving statements to support my declarations provided upon making the deposit at Demerara Bank Limited. I then contacted relatives and friends that presented me with financial gifts for my wedding and Christmas, 2023 and asked them to give statements to investigators of the Special Organised Crime Unit. I later submitted this statement which (is) true and correct.”
It is unclear whether DBL had flagged these deposits and whether friends and family had given the promised statements to SOCU. However, on June 12 this year, less than a month later, SOCU wrote the FIU stating that no case of money laundering or any serious offence had been established “as advised by the DPP” and therefore the investigation was closed. Up to this point there had been no information to the public about the money laundering investigation of Mr Brutus. An October 16 report by Stabroek News on the June 12 correspondence triggered an immediate response from SOCU which said that dozens of charges had been recommended in an “expanded” probe of Mr Brutus and the matter was now with the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).
SOCU said that this was based on critical information received from the FIU. Why wasn’t this “critical” information made available for the earlier probe when the same facts would have been available and the same bank accounts would have provided the telltale signs? This is quite baffling. Moreso as the police appeared to want to play down what was happening. On July 4th, the Guyana Police Force (GPF) announced the rotation of three Executive Leadership Team members as a part of what it said was its “modernisation” plan. Mr Brutus was included in the rotation from head of Administration to head of Special Branch but without any disclosure that he was the subject of a money-laundering probe.
A week later, the GPF announced that consequent to allegations of financial impropriety levelled against Deputy Commissioner (ag) Brutus, he had since requested permission to proceed on annualised vacation leave with immediate effect to facilitate an investigation in the best interest of the GPF. Again, the police made no mention of the probe being conducted by one of its arms, SOCU, and startlingly said that Mr Brutus had decided to go on leave because of the allegations on social media and by “established media houses”. By this point, of course, Mr. Brutus had been the subject of two money-laundering probes, one that cleared him and one that was in progress. Mr Brutus has since moved to the court seeking a number of declarations including that the acting Commissioner of Police Clifton Hicken acted ultra vires on July 4th 2024 by transferring him from the position of Deputy Commissioner due to “political directives and improper administrative procedures”.
Also being sought by Mr Brutus is a declaration that Cabinet acted ultra vires on July 11 2024 when it instructed the acting Commissioner of Police Hicken to send him on annual leave due to allegations of involvement in financial crimes.
On August 26, Minister of Home Affairs Robeson Benn told Stabroek News that he was awaiting an update from SOCU on the probe of Mr Brutus. It was only on October 16, following the Stabroek News report that SOCU provided an update.
Given the scale of allegations against Mr Brutus and the ancillary information that has come to light, a major cloud has enveloped the police. Not that it hasn’t been evident over the last four-plus years and during the tenure of previous PPP/C governments where senior policemen have faced all types of serious allegations. In this instance, with charges expected and with eyes keenly on the AML/CFT framework and this culture of the police force accepting monies – large sums – from members of the public and businesses who could potentially be the subject of money-laundering and other probes and who could expect a favour to duck investigations, the GPF faces a deep crisis. Mr Brutus’ wedding and who financed it, attended and provided monetary gifts could also become part of the investigation.
It should also be noted that the PPP/C government has cultivated Mr Brutus. It was purported that he was named as an acting Deputy Commissioner of Police. That doesn’t happen under this government unless one is in good graces with those who wield power. There had already been a number of matters that had been raised about Mr Brutus’s past but these were apparently glossed over until pressure was applied from somewhere in relation to the money-laundering probe this year. The rule of law must be paramount but this government’s outlook is to entrench people it can control and people who might do it favours at the right time. This de-professionalizing of the police force must come to an end and the public has to be provided with some assurance of how the government intends to do this even as it tries to parachute the acting Top Cop, Mr Hicken into the substantive position which he is not suited for and which in any case would be unconstitutional.