If there was any doubt in anyone's mind that a resolution of the Clico debacle can never be achieved unless and until the 15,000 bona fide "assenting" third-party policyholders are paid their just due by the PP Government, I trust that the recent expos� and subsequent events of the past two weeks would have put to bed any such notion.
It also bears testimony to the resilience and resourcefulness of a determined group of policyholders and their unswerving commitment to one common goal of being paid the contractual terms and conditions of their policies–not from the treasury but from the now fully funded Clico statutory fund.
I cannot help but reflect on the fact that most of them did not know each other prior to September 2010 when they were told by the then finance minister that the interest on their EFPA policies contracts would be frozen sine die. I also cannot help but reflect on the reason given at the time. I believe the minister said that he was looking for "ghost" accounts and added subsequently that EFPA policyholders had to take a haircut on the principal sum invested. But I digress.
The obvious reference above is to the clandestine, surreptitious, obscene, immoral, and vexatious attempt to include Clico/CLF former directors, their family members and related private companies as part of the multi-million dollar payout intended to bring much needed relief to the 1,500 bona fide non-assenting third-party policyholders announced by the Central Bank governor in March 2015.
Moreover, given pedestrian excuses that I have heard thus far, the more I think of it, what seems to have transpired here is reminiscent of the 2006 suspense-thriller Inside Man directed by Spike Lee. The movie centres on an elaborate bank heist on Wall Street over a 24-hour period. It stars Denzel Washington as Detective Keith Frazier, NYPD's hostage negotiator and Clive Owen as Dalton Russell, the mastermind who orchestrates the heist.
Russell opens the film with a prologue about having carried out the "perfect robbery." A van is seen driving from Brooklyn to the Wall Street area; inside is a team of masked robbers, dressed as painters, who call each other by variants of the name "Steve" (ie Steve, Stevie, Stevo). They seize control of a Manhattan bank and take the employees and patrons hostage. They divide the hostages into groups and hold them in different rooms, forcing them to strip and don painters' clothes identical to their own.
Police surround the bank and Detectives Frazier and his colleague take charge of the negotiations. When Russell (the criminal mastermind) is asked how he intends to leave the bank, he tells them "right through the front door." The police eventually storm the bank and detain everyone, knowing that some of the hostages are cleverly included among the members of the gang, but can't distinguish between who is hostage and who is bandit.
They interrogate all the "hostages" harshly, questioning their honesty and trying to glean useful information, to no avail. Additionally, a search of the bank reveals that the robbers' weapons are plastic replicas. With no way to identify the bandits from the bona fide hostages and unsure if a crime has been committed, Frazier's superior, on orders from the mayor, tells him to drop the case. And even though Frazier persists, Russell and his accomplices eventually get off scots free having committed the perfect crime.
It therefore begs the question are there any parallels that can be drawn from the above and recent multi-million dollar payout to former directors, or is this simply a case of life imitating art? Did the perpetrators walkout with the third-party policyholders? We prefer to let the intelligent and discerning public be the judge.
Peter Permell
Chairman
Clico Policyholders Group