Senior Reporter
derek.achong@guardian.co.tt
The Court of Appeal has been asked to consider whether the Financial Intelligence Unit of T&T (FIUTT) can request the disclosure of citizens’ private bank records without first receiving a report of a suspicious financial transaction or activity.
During a hearing at the Hall of Justice in Port-of-Spain, yesterday, appellate judges Mark Mohammed, Maria Wilson, and Geoffrey Henderson heard submissions in the appeal brought by FIUTT director Nigel Stoddard and the Office of the Attorney General after former police commissioner Gary Griffith, his wife Nicole Dyer-Griffith, and businessman Dwight Andrews pursued successful legal challenges against the FIUTT.
The Griffiths and Andrews filed their cases after they received a tip-off from a whistleblower, who claimed that Stoddard and the FIUTT were unlawfully seeking the disclosure of their financial records.
Stoddard and the FIUTT did not reveal what sparked its request as it pointed to secrecy provisions in the legislation that established it and in the oath of office taken by him (Stoddard).
In September 2023, High Court Judge Devindra Rampersad upheld the Griffiths’ case as he ruled that the FIUTT acted unconstitutionally and in excess of its jurisdiction in the way it sought the information on the Griffiths without allegedly receiving a Suspicious Transaction Report (STR) or a Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) from a financial institution or a law enforcement agency.
Presenting submissions in the appeal, King’s Counsel Peter Knox claimed that Justice Rampersad was wrong to uphold the case.
Knox claimed that the judge failed to consider Parliament’s intention to combat money laundering and terrorist financing in passing legislation to establish the unit.
“He (the judge) does not ask himself what the public interest Parliament was seeking to protect,” Knox said.
Stating that the legislation allowed the FIUTT to take the action it did, Knox said it was reasonably justifiable.
“The stronger the public interest, the greater infringement of rights is permissible,” Knox said.
“You (citizens) don’t have a reasonable expectation of privacy,” he added.
He suggested that the FIUTT was merely collecting information, which it would only forward to law enforcement agencies if there were reasonable grounds to do so.
“It is not an investigation. It is the collection of information,” Knox said.
In his response, Senior Counsel Larry Lalla said that the judge’s reasoning could not be faulted.
He stated that Parliament intended for the unit to be administrative in nature and to not have an independent power of inquiry.
“There must be some sort of trigger,” Lalla said.
In his closing remarks, Justice Rampersad noted that it seemed “more than just coincidental” that the FIU’s information request came after Griffith’s three-year stint in charge of the T&T Police Service ended in 2021 and amid probes into the issuing of firearm user’s licenses during his tenure.
“This seems to be an inescapable inference,” Justice Rampersad said.
However, he declined to suggest how the link arose.
The Griffiths and Andrews were also represented by Nicholas Persad.
Stoddard and the AG’s Office were represented by Vanessa Gopaul, Fazana Ali, and Michelle Benjamin.
