Prior to the closure of the State Assets Recovery Agency (SARA) in October 2020, Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs, Anil Nandlall said that all the cases that it took before the courts were drawn.
Nandlall told Guyana Standard that the agency had several cases before the court with the most controversial one being the Pradoville Two matter.
The case was premised on a 2015 SARA report which stated that in 2010, the Bharrat Jagdeo Cabinet had issued a directive for the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL) to privatize State lands. SARA contended that NICIL reportedly spent more than $200M to develop the seafront community without the knowledge and blessings of the National Assembly and other relevant bodies.
It argued that the said lands were then secretly sold to the former Ministers and known friends and associates of the previous regime. At the time of the sale, the report said, the lands were grossly undervalued and sold at a price substantially below the market value, thereby depriving the state of its full benefits.
Apart from this matter, Nandlall recalled that SARA had filed proceedings in the High Court seeking Civil Recovery Orders against Queens Atlantic Investment Inc. (QAII) and the Guyana Bank for Trade and Industry (GBTI). In a statement to the press in September 2019, SARA explained that it wants to recover $2.7B and $274M respectively, including interest as it believes that the two entities acquired properties in a manner not in keeping with the laws of the land, thereby leading to significant loss of revenue for the State.
Nandlall was keen to note that GBTI’s subsequent victory in the courts against SARA proved beyond measure that all of the agency’s cases were doomed to fail. The Minister said, “All of its cases were destined to fail because they were improperly instituted in the name of SARA. The Act says clearly that the Director of the agency is the Corporate Sole, meaning, only the Director had the legal authority or standing to take the matter to court.” Nandlall went on to state that the appointment of the said Director did not comply with the provisions of the law which requires the said person to be appointed by the National Assembly. Instead, the former head, Professor Clive Thomas, was appointed by the former coalition government. “This was the grounds on which GBTI won the case against them,” he added.
With respect to the Pradoville case, the Attorney General said that this was a foolish matter to begin with as the certificates of title issued to the beneficiaries could only be set aside if fraud was committed. Since proving this was a failed exercise, the agency had no case he said.
The Minister said that the dismantled agency had approximately 12 matters before the courts and all have been withdrawn.
