Latest update July 26th, 2026 2:05 AM
Latest News
- Pres. Ali to unveil 5-member Int’l COI today to probe MV Barima disaster
- After six years of pumping oil, Guyana’s debt increased sixfold
- Other nations’ ministers stepped down following deadly ferry disasters
- Grieving mother calls on Govt. to subsidise airfares after ferry tragedy claims son
- GHRA demands Parliament-led COI into MV Barima sinking
The fact and the fiction
When the parliamentary opposition contended that the government was trying to rush the anti-money laundering Bill through the National Assembly the government retorted that this was not the case, that it was awaiting the passage of legislation in the more developed countries so that it could see the various pitfalls.
Close research revealed that no major country was drafting legislation. The United States to which Guyana was looking had legislation in place for a long time to the extent that it has even been tracking the movement of money and prosecuting those found guilty of money laundering.
Just last week, it set its eyes on a former Central American head of state who had laundered some US$70 million, using banks in the United States. That man has been extradited to stand trial in the United States because of the existing legislation.
This week another metropolitan country, France, announced that it was blacklisting two Caribbean countries on charges of encouraging foreign aid. The two Caribbean countries were Trinidad and Dominica. They allegedly allowed their banks to launder the money stolen from funds designed for the development of poor countries.
At issue, here, is the fact that these countries have legislation that could aid Guyana. Why we chose not to examine those pieces of legislation to aid in the drafting of our amended legislation is not known. In this technological age when just about every piece of information can be gleaned from a computer, Guyanese lawmakers could not profess to be denied access to modern legislation.
The political opposition, quite rightly, queried the haste with which Government was trying to pass the legislation through the House. It claimed that it needed to study the various clauses in the legislation and to good effect since there has never been any prosecution for money laundering in Guyana.
Guyana had earlier passed two pieces of anti-money laundering legislation but these had so numerous loopholes that the Financial Investigation Unit could not even arrest or prosecute someone caught red-handed. The old laws stipulated that commercial banks report all suspicious financial transactions. This was never done for a series of reasons.
For one, the heads of commercial banks claimed that they were not protected. One such head of a bank actually said that there was the real risk of him being killed within hours of reporting any suspicious transactions.
Others contended that the Central Bank, which is provided by law with all transactions that occur in the commercial banking system, was in a position to detect the suspicious transactions even if the commercial banks did not report them.
The way in which the laws have been applied would suggest that there have been no illegal transactions since the Central Bank never moved against any of the transactions that may have been recorded by the commercial banks. It transpired that the Central Bank did not have the support of the existing legislation.
And so we come to the situation that has seen Guyana in a mad scramble to have proper legislation in place and herein lies the problem. For all the attacks and counterattacks by the various political parties there seemed to be real desire to have the anti-money laundering legislation in place. The government had already informed the nation that severe sanctions loomed if the legislation was not in place.
It would now seem that there would have been sanctions in any case. The United States Ambassador to Guyana, Brent Hardt, actually said that this country actually made no effort to combat money laundering so there would have been sanctions in any case.
Such comments are not strange. Since 1992 this country has not prosecuted one single prominent person, despite whatever illegality this person might have done. Prominent drug dealers are allowed to road untouched; prominent people found guilty of corruption in public office have been left to continue with the excuse that there is just not enough evidence; and people with sudden newfound wealth have not been asked to account to the Guyana Revenue Authority, which in turn has made no effort to mount investigations.
Instead, the political authorities have bombarded the society with frightening claims and contentions without admitting that the very powers that be have created the situation.
Share this:
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.