Govt’s commitment to anti-money laundering must be matched with adequate resources

Dear Editor,

Your very useful article on the findings reported in the interim report of the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (SN 18/09/23) indicates that accountants and lawyers do not fully understand their AMLCFT obligations. While that is indeed so, I do not believe that it would be fair to attribute to the members of those professions all the blame for that situation.

One of the contributory factors is that despite the provision several years ago in Schedule 4 to the Anti-Money Laundering Act for the Minister of Finance to designate a Supervisory Authority for both accountants and lawyers, it is barely a month since a Compliance Com-mission was created and designated as that supervisory authority. And as of today’s date, that Commission is yet to be appointed.

While I do not speak for either profession, I have been involved in training and sensitisation programmes with both accountants, more than five years ago, and attorneys as recent as last Saturday. I believe I am right in saying that members of both professions understand the importance of their compliance for their professional standing and for the country. But they do have a right the question legislation which seeks to upend principles sacred to their profession, the society at large and the Constitution.

For fear of being named by the international Financial Action Task Force as a non-compliant anti-money laundering country, Guyana at times has shown an almost obsequious willingness to comply with all anti money laundering recommendations and principles on a one-size-fits-all basis. To the Government I would say that Anti-money laundering involves more than the Financial Intelligence Unit, the Police, various designated activities such as banking, securities and the financial institutions and supervisory authorities.

It should involve, among others, the Integrity Commission and the Guyana Elections Commission which have been derelict in their statutory obligations. It is an absolute disgrace that the Chair of GECOM would make the lame excuse that GECOM “never operationalised” the provision of the legislation regarding expenditure by political parties. Just thinking of the unaccounted, untransparent and unlawful transactions involving hundreds of millions both before and after the 2020 elections is frightening. And GECOM does not care.   

And the FIU itself, the premier anti-money laundering state entity in Guyana, needs more resources to carry out its functions and obligations. Despite the plethora of AML legislation passed over the past five years, Parliament has not provided that body with commensurate resources. Bodies such as the Gold Board, the Forestry Commission and the GGMC would need to set up AML Units if they can properly carry out the functions of a supervisory authority. And might I add that in my opinion, it is inappropriate for the GRA to be designated as a supervisory authority.

I commend the Government for its commitment to ensure that Guyana remains an AML compliant country. The commitment must be matched by the provision of adequate resources and properly thought-out decisions, consultation and legislation. 

Yours faithfully,

Christopher Ram