Marks refutes claims of blackmail By Shirley Thomas
Guyana Chronicle
October 15, 2002

Related Links: Articles on corruption
Letters Menu Archival Menu

COMMISSIONER of Customs and Trade Administration Mr. Lambert Marks has refuted claims made in yesterday's ‘Kaieteur News’ that Customs had "blackmailed an importer for approximately $5M in additional duties and compensation, and that "the Administration may be guilty of extortion and blackmail".

According to the article which appeared on page 12 of yesterday's issue of the newspaper, "Officials inside the department forced a city businessman to pay some $5M as additional duties and penalties," allegedly in relation to 'misinformation supplied by the importers' which would have influenced invoicing. ‘Kaieteur News’ is claiming that the monetary penalty should have been "$25,000, together with a jail term of three years," in accordance with Section 217 (a), "of the Customs Act, and not the amount it said was imposed by the Administration.

The matter was in relation to the invoicing for a large quantity of frozen chicken imported into the country by the private importer. The article is accusing the Customs and Trade Administration of refusing to process documents for the consignment of frozen chicken on the wharf until such time as the payment was made.

According to ‘Kaieteur News’, "This demand for the money came ... one day after the importer had blasted the Government and President Bharrat Jagdeo in one of his television commentaries."

At a press conference held at the CTA Conference Room, Main Street yesterday afternoon, Marks stated categorically: “I wish to refute the article... because it is deliberately trying to put a political twist to a professional matter."

He said that the importer would be well advised, if he has a problem with the Government, to resolve that problem with Government, and not drag him (Marks) into it. The Commissioner reiterated: "I am not a politician. I am a professional serving the people of Guyana."

Marks said that importer Marine Foods (owned by EC Vieira) produced a contract with ICS Miami, which is owned by another individual (Patrick Mekdeci), for the importation of 2.5 million pounds of chicken leg quarters.

He said that based on the contract, Marine Foods (owned by Vieira) declared the chicken leg quarters at US 21 cents per pound as compared to approximately US 27cents per pound declared by other importers. He pointed out that the very company was known to pay the same US27 cents prior to the arrival of the shipment under dispute.

Marks said it was found out that the two importers Vieira and Mekdeci are business partners, but claim differently in their declaration in the Customs C32 (a) form.

"This in essence, was a false declaration with the intent to defraud the Customs of revenue," he stressed, adding: "It is tantamount to establishing a contract with yourself for your benefit."

The Commissioner said that, Customs, after investigation, raised the declared price from US21 cents to US 27 cents in line with what other importers use, and the duties and taxes were re-computed, whereby Marine Foods had to pay $2,495,000 in additional duties and compensation of the said amount, in keeping with the Customs Act Chapter 82:0, Section 217 (a) for false declaration, and Section 218 (e) for intent to defraud.

Marks outlined that Section 218 (e) stipulates a penalty of three times the duties and taxes that the importer attempted to evade.

Accordingly, he said, Marine Foods were informed of their violation of the law, and they willingly paid the additional duties, taxes and compensation.

"At no time was Marine Foods blackmailed or held to ransom," the Commissioner stressed.

He also disclosed that in 2001 another importer by the same name, and at the very wharf at Houston, acted in collusion with a Customs Officer to defraud the Customs of Revenue. As a result, he was made to pay additional duties and compensation in excess of $600,000. The Customs Officer was dismissed.

Noting that the actions taken by the CTA do not constitute a one-shot affair, Marks said that the Department has had reason to take professional legal action in the past, and has done likewise on this occasion.