Last Monday, the Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and Governance convened a panel discussion on `Building resilient institutions against corruption’ to coincide with Anti-corruption Day. One of the more remarkable attributes of the event was that the chairperson allowed no questions. This undermined the entire purpose of the event and made a mockery of the importance of a free exchange of views.
Those who spoke on behalf of the government did so fulsomely about its efforts to rein in corruption but there was silence on important components in the fight against corruption although some of these were alluded to by the Regional Anti-Corruption Adviser for the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crimes, Guglielmo Castaldo, who appeared virtually. Prime among these is the absence of functioning whistleblower legislation.
The Protected Disclosures Act was passed in January 2018 under the APNU+AFC government. Needless to say, it has since lain dormant as the enabling instruments have not been put in place. Into the 5th year of its government, the PPP/C is completely disinterested in such legislation as it would dramatically increase reports about corruption. The government makes a lot of noise about best practices but it is not open to whistleblower legislation and has weaved a society of information control along with the spectre of retribution for those who might dare testify about wrongdoings.
Speaking last month to an assembly of civil society representatives in Jamaica, Richard Jones, executive director of the Caribbean Policy Development Centre (CPDC) emphasised the importance of whistleblower legislation.
According to a report in the Jamaica Gleaner, he highlighted the critical role whistleblowers play in exposing corruption and mismanagement.
“Without strong whistleblower protections, employees may fear retaliation for reporting misconduct, which can prevent serious issues from being addressed,” he stated. “This fear stifles transparency and undermines public trust in our governance systems.”
He underscored that, particularly in sensitive areas such as human rights, social justice, and anti-corruption, employees must feel secure in reporting issues of concern without the risk of losing their jobs or facing legal repercussions. It is a truth that the Guyana Government should also recognize.
Former Auditor General Anand Goolsarran has lamented on several occasions that the Protected Disclosures Act is yet to be operationalised.
Another crucial facet in the fight against corruption is access to information. While the relevant legislation has been in place it is not functioning and has been this way for years. Moreover, the structure of the Act is geared to enable as little access as possible to information, something this government no doubt feels quite comfortable with.
Given the gargantuan size of the public sector programmme with billions and billions of contracts being handed out it has never been more important to have a robust anti-corruption system but that system does not exist here. There have been glaring examples over the last four-plus years which signal the scale of the problem and how the government itself might have irreversibly compromised the system by having contracts channelled to their supporters and friends. There are well-known examples and they may only be the tip of the iceberg: the assigning of big construction projects to Tepui Group Inc, Spectre Construction Inc, St8tment Investment Inc and more recently a smaller road contract to attorney Charrandass Persaud who surprisingly voted in 2018 with the then opposition party in a no confidence motion against the government. These all fall into the category of jobs for the boys, are indefensible and clear breaches of the procurement law. Furthermore, people who know the PPP would be well aware that evaluation committees under the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board would be readily available for instructions on who should win contracts and who shouldn’t. Transparency and probity are the hapless victims of this unmeritocratic system devised by powerbrokers in the government. Unless these problems are addressed the image of the country will continue to be scarred by corruption.
In his presentation at the panel discussion, the Director of the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), Matthew Langevine spoke glowingly of the systems that are in place to address problems such as money laundering and corruption. He was also exultant at Guyana’s recent winning of the Best Regional AML/CFT Case Award at the 59th Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) Plenary and Working Group Meetings in Jamaica. The winning case centred on Guyana’s use of suspicious transaction reporting, intelligence analysis, and investigative techniques to eventually bring charges against Assistant Commissioner of Police, Calvin Brutus, for money laundering and other financial related offences. It would not be lost on those who heard Mr Langevine’s presentation that the Brutus case also underlines the scale of the alleged transgressions and the deep-seated weaknesses in the AML/CFT framework that permitted them. The case brought against Mr Brutus could not have been an isolated one. Its exposure was driven by certain factors but it is clear that there is a lot more to unearth.
MrLangevine was also completely silent on the elephant in the room as it relates to corruption, money laundering and smuggling – the illegal exportation and undervaluing of gold exports. That scourge has seen three persons in Guyana, including a serving Permanent Secretary being sanctioned this year under the stringent US Global Magnitsky Sanctions Program. The scale of the allegations against two gold dealers here was mind-boggling and would have required the compromising of the entire anti-money laundering calculus. Of course, the Guyana Government is yet to make any progress on investigating the circumstances that led to the sanctions.
The FIU under Mr Langevine had itself recommended in 2019 that a high-level team be established to conduct a comprehensive review of the trading of gold amid concerns that Venezuelan gold was filtering into the local market. This was never implemented and could help to explain why the Global Magnitsky hammer fell this year on two dealers. It was not possible to glean from Mr Langevine’s presentation whether he and the FIU are of the view that gold trading remans a threat to the AML framework.
There were presentations at the panel discussion by the representatives of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the World Bank who both stressed the importance of strong institutions in fighting corruption.
To combat corruption, the IDB Representative Lorena Solorzano Salazar said that there must be focus on building strong and accountable institutions.
“An economy is only as good as the quality of their institutions”, the IDB Representative said, adding that “resilient institutions are the cornerstone of an equitable society. They ensure that resources are used efficiently and services are delivered effectively”.
Unfortunately, key accountability institutions here remain under the control of the government and the appointees are there to operate as rubber stamps.
It is clear that there is much more that needs to be done to clean up corruption here. It won’t be achieved if the PPP/C government ignores key elements in the anti-corruption arsenal and curates an image that bears little resemblance to the reality.
