In a unanimous decision on Friday, Full Court Judges, Justice Nareshwar Harnanan and Justice Fidela Corbin-Lincoln, dismissed an appeal filed by the Guyana Bank for Trade and Industry (GBTI) to reverse a production order directing the financial institution to handover relevant documents to as part of evidence for an ongoing Anti-Money Laundering investigation.
This appeal was filed following the July 5, 2018, ruling by High Court Judge, Justice Franklin Holder, who granted a production order directing GBTI to produce specific records of transactions; documents which are relevant to identifying, locating or quantifying property (or tainted property as the case may be) or locating a document necessary for the transfer of such property (or tainted property), where a person is being investigated for a serious offence – money laundering with respect to Deborah A Forbes, Rosanna Ramnarine-Mangal and Keith Dyer – after hearing an Ex parte application for the production of the said documents pursuant to the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Act Cap 10:11. The ex parte application for the production of the documents was filed by the Special Organised Crime Unit (SOCU).
Unsatisfied with the ruling, the banking institution filed an appeal in the Full Court of the High Court seeking to rescind the order. GBTI’s appeal was based on the grounds that: The Learned Trial Judge erred in not ordering service of the application on the Appellant (Respondent) to give the Appellant an opportunity to be heard; and that the Judge erred in ordering documents to be produced which are banker’s books the production of which section 24(2) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter the Financing of Terrorism Act’s prohibits.
State Counsel Leslyn Noble
State Counsel Leslyn Noble, before addressing the issues raised in the court, submitted to the court that the Appellant has not established any basis on which it has contended that this court ought to interfere with the finding of fact; that is, the satisfaction of the trial Judge that there are sufficient grounds to grant the said production order as the Appellant’s grounds of appeal are misconceived and without merit.
As such, on Friday, the Full Court ruled that Justice Holder acted in compliance with the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Act, to hear the application exparte.
The court also ruled that Section 24 of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Act does not prohibit the production of copies of the banker’s books.
As part of the court’s ruling, GBTI was ordered to comply with the order of Justice Holder by November 12, 2018, at 16:30h. The banking institution was also made to pay a cost to the respondent in the sum of $150,000.
GBTI was represented by Senior Counsel Ralph Ramkarran.
Following the ruling, Noble commented that banking institutions are not entitled to the information presented to the court outlining the (SOCU) Respondent’s reasons for investigating the customer of the Applicant since the production order merely compels the bank to deliver certified copies of documents that it may possess in respect of its customer.
“Appellant being present at the hearing of the application could be tantamount to tipping off in contravention of Section 5 of the Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism Act Cap 10:11. In fact, the banking institutions should be cooperating with the law enforcement agencies [SOCU] to combat financial crimes. In fact, the banks have an important role in ensuring the promotion of high ethical and professional standards in the financial sector,” the State Counsel posited.
GBTI has a string of litigations against SOCU in the courts over the access of bank records for money-laundering suspects. In fact, the directors of the banking institution were even hauled before the courts for failing to comply with a court order for the production of documents for an ongoing criminal investigation being carried out SOCU – an arm of the Guyana Police Force.
