I have noted the divergent views on the probe by the Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) into alleged corruption by the Guyana Police Force (GPF), specifically those views by the Private Sector Commission (PSC) and the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GCCI).
It is good to see that the Chamber has taken a bold position, which I imagine, benefitted from due consideration. Similarly, I am sure the leadership of the PSC did same.
Of particular note, the Chamber’s President has assured its members that the Chamber’s position is intended to be in the best interest of the Chamber. This is of course good in spirit and intent. Within this thematic area of concern that borders “corruption”, there has been, of recent, two major events that occurred: (i) the sanctions imposed on a leading business entity in Guyana and a senior government official for alleged money laundering/transnational crime and (ii) within the same time frame, Guyana had just concluded its voluntary country review by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF) on its anti-corruption framework. Of note, the report showed marked improvement since the country’s 2011 review, which was very bad, as you may recall when Guyana was “grey listed” by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF).
Thus, as regards our anti-corruption legal framework, we have come a far way. However, there remains some key areas of improvement that were flagged by the CFATF/FATF country review. Mainly, in the area of bolstering the institutional capacity of local investigative and enforcement institutions, namely SOCU, which is the arm of the GPF that was established to investigate financial crimes, money laundering, and other matters relating to corruption. It is therefore in the national interest that all stakeholders involved play a key role towards achieving this objective, through the building of stronger domestic institutions over time.
I am unsure whether the GCCI considered the referenced reports, and the implications therein for the country. The country’s failure to improve in this regard, could have more damaging implications for the private sector in the longer term, in particular, as it exposes the domestic financial system to undue risks in terms of losing correspondent banking relationships. This, in turn, would enable a cut off from the international payment system, if not adequately addressed over the medium term.
With the above in mind, it is my considered view that we ought to be very careful such that, we do not want to unnecessarily undermine our domestic institutions, whether perceptually or materially without credible and legitimate cause, given the broader range of adverse implications it could engender for the country.
I believe, therefore, that all of the private sector bodies together have a critical role to play in, firstly, examining the recommendations of the last CFATF/FATF country review, and determine a role for the private sector, to facilitate, contribute and/or assist with the implementation of those recommendations with alacrity. Indeed, it is in all of our best interests to so do, chiefly the private sector.