The GPF and the charges against Mr Brutus

On Thursday, Deputy Police Commissioner Calvin Brutus appeared in court along with three others to face a series of charges. According to the GPF, he was given a bail of US$9.1 million.

He was charged along with two others with conspiracy to commit a crime – obtained by false pretenses. In a separate indictment, Adonika Aulder, Mr. Brutus’ wife, faced two counts of money laundering. They were not required to plead and were each granted $1,000,000 bail.

In addition, Mr Brutus was subsequently charged with 21 counts of public servant liability under the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act (FMAA). He did not have to plead to the charges.

The matter was adjourned until November 18, 2024 for report and Mr Brutus is due to return to court later to hear the remainder of the charges. The liability of official facilities under the FMAA has apparently not been used before.

Section 85 of the FMAA describes this liability as follows: An officer who –

falsifies any account, statement, receipt or other document issued or retained for the purposes of this Act, the Regulations, the Financial Circulars or any other instrument made under this Act;

conspires or conspires with another person to defraud the State or gives any person the opportunity to defraud the State; or

knowingly permits another person to violate any provision of this law,

is guilty of a criminal offense and, if convicted, is liable to a fine of $2 million and imprisonment for three years.

Mr. Brutus is facing serious charges. Some of them read out in court on Thursday said Brutus wrote two checks for $6 million and $7 million from the Guyana Police Force to himself.

It was also alleged that on November 16, 2023, at GPF headquarters, he instructed female Inspector Collins of the Police Consumers Co-op Society to make out a check for $20 million in his name. The money was to be used to buy items for the GPF, but these were never purchased and instead were said to have been paid into Mr Brutus’ personal account.

Third, it is alleged that on June 31 at the GPF headquarters, he instructed another police officer to surrender 221 receipts, which he paid to his wife.

It is further alleged that on November 28 and 29, 2023, at GPF headquarters, he told Women Inspector Collins of the Police Consumers Co-op Society to prepare checks worth $60 million from the Police Consumers Co-op Society in his name . The money was to be used for repairs and maintenance of the same Police Consumers Co-op Society, but instead Mr Brutus is said to have collected the money and used it for his own purposes.

Mr. Brutus was also charged with theft. It is alleged that he used a police officer to steal $60 million and $20 million from GPF at different intervals, which is linked to the two checks set up by female Inspector Collins.

Mr Brutus also faces two charges related to money laundering. It is alleged he paid $85 million for a property on 5th Street, Alberttown in Georgetown, using money from the proceeds of crime.

Secondly, it is alleged that Mr Brutus paid US$20 million for a property in Pouderoyen, Demerara’s West Bank. This money comes directly or indirectly from crime.

Before his downfall, Mr. Brutus was on his way to the top of the corps. Given the seriousness of the charges against him, two things are clear. The damaged credibility of the Guyana Police Force (GPF) has been further diminished. The charges against Mr Brutus are a fatal blow to the force and given the government’s weak leadership and clear intention to make the force subservient and pliable, a dangerous moment has been reached. This force needs immediate rescue and the restoration of some measure of respect. This can only be achieved by temporarily attracting external leadership. This is something this newspaper has been advocating, dating back to the murder of Monica Reece in 1993. PPP/C governments never responded to this need because they could not imagine losing control of the police.

The government may now have little choice. With the massive expansion of the economy, billions of dollars of oil revenues flowing into the country, increasing external and domestic investments and growing vigilance around the AML/CFT framework, it is only natural that a Deputy Commissioner of Police would be confronted with serious money laundering charges. to make a mockery of the functioning and authority of the armed forces. How does the country begin to recover from this without radical changes?

The second point to make about Mr. Brutus’ allegations is that they did not arise overnight or in a vacuum. Given the magnitude of the charges against him – many of which have yet to be read – various levels of the force must have been complicit or at least compromised. That these alleged crimes could have occurred without being previously discovered speaks poorly of the armed forces’ leadership and internal accountability systems. It is unclear at this time what prompted the charges, but it is clear that there was no due diligence and compliance with financial accountability laws.

The maneuvering is not over yet. A day after his indictment, Brutus’ lawyers suddenly withdrew the case he had filed against the police commissioner, the attorney general, the interior minister and others. The claims Mr Brutus made in this case and the relief he sought were quite serious. Did he only take this action in an attempt to deflect charges? Has he now given up the action so that he can concentrate on the major defense he now has to mount in connection with the dozens of charges filed against him? Or is there even more in the mortar than in the pestle?

These charges against Mr. Brutus raise major questions about financial probity in the upper echelons of the police force, and the answers lie in radical action to burn away its problems.