Dear Editor,

  We are addressing this open request for help to the honourable people of Anguilla during this auspicious time of your 50th Anniversary (May 30) of the Anguilla Revolution. Firstly, we would like to congratulate you on your continued stability as a nation and wish everyone God’s blessings.

  For the record, we the citizens of the Caribbean who have registered businesses, personal or business bank accounts in Anguilla over the past 10 years have had funds deposited in our bank accounts prior to March 24, 2016 confiscated.

  The National Bank of Anguilla (NBA) (Private Banking & Trust Ltd. (PB&T)) was regulated by the Anguilla Financial Services Commission and not the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank (ECCB). Both of these institutions acted improperly and they facilitated the removal of the Depositors funds from the PB&T.

  The transgression took place under the nose of the Government of Anguilla, United Kingdom Government, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and other Offices of the Government since they are all alleged to have been part and parcel of the decision making process that has led to this mistreatment of honest, hard-working Caribbean citizens and Anguilla nationals.

  My Anguillian comrades, we are being taken unfair advantage of, and we need your support to ensure good judgement and honesty prevails to ensure the return of Depositors rightfully owned assets and the full guarantee of all Customer deposits.

  Our rights have been violated and our assets were taken unjustly and we are all the victims of naked discrimination against foreigners and nationals.

  Furthermore, no provision has been made for prompt, adequate and effective compensation as required by International Law.

  There are numerous Anguilla registered companies and their shareholders that have been affected. One of the prime examples is a company called SATAY Limited which was incorporated since 2005 in Anguilla. SATAY Limited is a fully registered business with a CBTC Licence granted by the Ministry of Finance and existing under the laws of Anguilla to conduct business on the Island of Anguilla.

  SATAY Limited has two local Directors on its board and this entity indirectly provided employment to seven Anguilla nationals through its business related alliance with Counsel Limited, a locally owned accounting firm.

  Counsel Limited provides support to 11 other real Caribbean-based trading companies such as SATAY Limited. We (Depositors) are all residents in the Caribbean and engage in active business.

  The shareholders of SATAY Limited originally chose to conduct business in Anguilla due to the ease of which transactions could be facilitated through the professionalism, dedication and prompt service they received from the Anguilla staff working at the NBA and Counsel Limited.

  Secondly, we would like to present some background information so that everyone understands what has occurred in your banking sector and the present terrible financial situation. Until recently there were in Anguilla only two “domestic” banks, i.e. banks owned by Anguillian shareholders and not affiliated with any foreign bank, to wit, the NBA, and the Caribbean Commercial Bank (CCB). Both the NBA and the CCB had subsidiaries which were licensed to accept deposits from persons who were not citizens of Anguilla (the “Offshore Banks”).

  Neither parent bank (the “Onshore Banks”), nor any other bank operating in Anguilla, was licensed to accept deposits from persons who were not citizens, or from companies beneficially owned by persons who were not citizens of Anguilla.

  However, because the beneficial owner of SATAY Limited and the owners of the other 11 Caribbean based trading companies, are not Anguillan “belongers,” SATAY Limited’s operating bank account and the other 11 companies was for some reason opened in one of the two Offshore Banks, the NBA (Private Banking & Trust) Ltd.

  From inception the NBA PB&T, in spite of being a separate legal entity, was operated by its parent, the NBA, as if it were no more than an internal department, and a cash cow, of the parent. PB&T sent deposited funds to the NBA which treated them as its own, using them as it saw fit. The Directors, Officers and management of the PB&T were oblivious to their fiduciary duty to protect the PB&T’s accountholders, even after the liquidity problems of the NBA became, or should have become, apparent to them.

  On or about August 12, 2013, to protect the position of the Onshore Banks’ depositors, and without reference to the Offshore Bank’s depositors, both Onshore Banks were placed into Conservatorship, subject to the control of the ECCB.

  The PB&T was not in Conservatorship, but, from the time of the appointment of the NBA’s Conservator, being that PB&T was a subsidiary of the NBA, the Conservator of the NBA was the de facto operating manager of the PB&T.

  Consequently, the highly improper practices established during NBA’s pre-Conservatorship management of PB&T were adopted and continued during the Conservatorship to the ultimate detriment of the PB&T and its depositors. That the Conservator, like the NBA/PB&T managers he succeeded, might have a conflict of interest, and conflicting fiduciary duties to the two banks, appears to have been intentionally ignored by all concerned, including the ECCB, their appointed Conservator, and the directors, officers and managers of both the Onshore Bank and the Offshore Bank.

  The ECCB and the Anguilla Financial Services Commission must be held accountable for the mismanagement of all local and Caribbean Depositors accounts as they willingly accepted deposits and allowed withdrawals from SATAY Limited’s account at the NBA PB&T.

  SATAY Limited never received any official notice and was never made aware of the fact that the NBA was placed into Conservatorship on August 12, 2013 and was subject to the control of a Conservator appointed by the ECCB from that date until April 22, 2016. In any event the Conservator has never placed any restrictions on withdrawals from balances on SATAY Limited’s accounts or any of the other business accounts at the NBA.

  Thirdly, SATAY Limited was operating as an active legitimate business with a bank account that was fully functional from 2005 up to April 2016.

  No solutions or viable alternatives are being offered to SATAY Limited or any of the Caribbean based Depositors and their businesses at this time. We have no access to our bank accounts and irreparable harm is being done to our businesses and livelihoods.

  Since appointment, the ECCB as Conservators of the Onshore Banks worked on a plan to restructure them (the “Resolution Plan”). That plan was implemented on April 25, 2016 with the merger of the two privately owned Onshore Banks into a new entity, the National Commercial Bank of Anguilla (NCBA), wholly owned by the Government of Anguilla.

  The Offshore Banks had no part in the merger. All the assets of the Onshore Banks were acquired by the NCBA, but only some of their liabilities were assumed. Among the assets acquired are the PB&T’s depositors’ funds in the custody of the NBA. Among the liabilities not assumed is the obligation to pay to the PB&T or to the depositors of the PB&T any funds deposited prior to 24 March 2016.

  The ECCB and one of its appointed Conservators (who is now the CEO of NCBA), the Receiver of the NBA (a former senior employee of the NBA), in collusion with the Government of Anguilla, sought to protect only its domestic depositors, and to do so at the expense of its Caribbean-based and other foreign depositors, instead of taking meaningful steps to correct the mismanagement of the assets of the Onshore Banks which led to their collapse in the first place.

  The only way for Anguilla to exist with stability and integrity within the global financial system and region is by ensuring due diligence prevails and the money that was wrongly taken from the PB&T bank accounts and local registered companies is immediately returned to the Depositors.

  Failing this, Anguilla will lose all credibility and stability in the international banking sector and we will all be going down a long road to financial loss through lengthy litigation processes.

  The news of the Anguilla financial debacle is gaining media coverage globally and many more Anguilla nationals in the indigenous banking and financial services support sectors will lose their jobs as the locally registered Caribbean-based and international businesses will be forced to take their investments elsewhere and bank accounts will never materialise at the newly formed NCBA.

  Our fate is in your hands and we implore the good people of Anguilla and local Government to implement appropriate regulation and legislation, judicious licensing, comprehensive monitoring and good governance to ensure the Caribbean based Depositors bank accounts and rightfully owned business assets are returned to us so that we would not lose faith in your system and can continue our good business relationships with Anguilla.

  Respectfully,

The Depositors

Dear Editor,

I admit to writing this with some trepidation and the proverbial shaking hands. I read in this newspaper some weeks ago and now confirmed yesterday about the “Asset Seizure Squad” and, if what I read is accurate, it is the scariest thing since the Nazis looted Europe. As I read the article yesterday, it would appear on its face that the Public Prosecutor can, with neither legal probable cause as determined by a judicial review nor any sort of due process, show up at your door, seize your house and belongings and then say “Prove to us (not the courts) just US that this stuff is really yours and that you bought it all with money that we approve of.”

And so would begin the chase. First you get a lawyer with a big retainer and a US $400 per hour rate. Then you start the dance. Because, according to the paper, this is not a judicial procedure and because, ostensibly you are merely a suspect because someone didn’t like your looks yet have been charged with no crime nor have any case to answer, who is the legal authority that says after you have been bankrupted with legal fees, “Ok... we believe you,... here is your house and car back?”

I am a serious law and order guy. I am all for convicting criminals and stripping them of their ill-gotten gains and hanging them up by their toes in the public square. I think the level of “quality of life” crime on this island is out of control and the mini criminals that get off with suspended sentences all the time should all be doing hard time. But having said that, turning the prosecutor’s office into what effectively now becomes a third world gestapo-esque arm of government that can come to your house in the middle of the night with no warrant issued after review by a judge and based on some rules ( not laws ) that are arbitrary and have neither been debated nor approved by the legislature,   kick down your door and confiscate your personal property, is insane. In the real world, how hard would it be to do this all in a civilized fashion?

You think Citizen X is a criminal engaged in such activity that will warrant asset forfeiture? Great. Take your Proof ,... not your guesses, innuendos, here say, rumour and gossip.... but your hard Proof and stand in front of a court with real Judges and next to the guy whose stuff you are trying to grab and make your case. Give him a chance to defend himself without having to go thru bankruptcy to do it. Convince the judge that will hold you to an honest legal standard and get a legal court order to grab the stuff. That is what civilized societies do. In the name of all that is moral and right, don’t let those that describe St. Maarten as a “Banana Republic” be proven correct. Be tough on crime but be honest and fair in the way you do it.

Steven Johnson

Dear Editor,

  Seventeen years ago I went to Suriname for the first time.  One of the things that caught my attention is that there were no very big tour busses.  Neither for tours or for the rest of the public transportation.  Even though the majority of the roads are twice the width of our roads and as I was explained, Paramaribo, where I stayed, is about four times the size of St. Maarten there were only what we call here Coasters (24 seats).  Paramaribo counted approximately 200,000 inhabitants at that time.

  On my arrival back on St. Maarten I spoke to people involved in importing motor vehicles in St. Maarten as well as politicians in government, concerning the imminent traffic congestion if the import of motor vehicles which was growing steadily is not stemmed. One of the answers that I got was that there were already discussions concerning traffic congestion, but at that time those involved in the harbour did not think it was necessary to make that a priority.

  Later I understood why because as time progressed and seeing the developments I assumed at that time that already plans for more oversized busses were in the making.  Because for years now we have had the same people in government, my question is who is to blame for the tight squeeze that we have at the Rhine road in Maho.  I have another question though.  Are there not daily tight squeezes all over the island? So is it only because Maho is feeling the squeeze now that mention is made of it in the papers?

  Brings back thoughts of how the politicians reacted when a restaurant was closed because of hygiene conditions.  I am sure you have letters from me concerning traffic congestion.  With Public transportation in the hands of the public (government) there will be less traffic congestion.  Place bus stops in the essential places. Guarantee public transportation to all points of the country. Better control on the gypsies and I can go on.  If we do not control the import of motor vehicles and these, for St. Maarten, oversized tour busses and also if we do not stop the increase in the amount of motor vehicles per car rental, we are going to kill the goose that lay the golden egg.

  The time share saga has already put a dent in the industry, and the cruise industry seems to be concentrating on quantity and not quality. The constant increase in numbers of cruise passengers has not done anything for the private sector in proportion to their sales. There is no option for free parking around the airport.

  No everything must not be free; but when in years the minimum wage has not correctly been adjusted and everything else cost money and the cost of living is constantly and steadily increasing  and the elected government officials are compensated for two years after, if they are re-elected to be able to ease themselves back into where they were before being elected, where is everyone going to get the means of paying for all of these extras which the majority of us cannot avoid, as a consequence of the inadequate  governing for so many years?

  So do not only deal with what causes the traffic squeezes but also replace the traffic lights at the Bernhard bridge for lights of which parts can be obtained when necessary or change the traffic situation on the spot. It is obvious that the lay of the land would call for moving back and shifting, but that is nothing new for us. The causeway is proof of that. 

I almost did not mention that the slower the traffic moves the more gasoline is burned.

Russell A. Simmon

Dear Editor,

In the past week the much talked about and heralded screening is again in the news. And our foreign provided justice system is used to promoting a system that at the end of the day won’t stand up to the test of a true democratic society. We have seen with quite some consternation that our election was set aside by instructions from the Dutch deciding who can form part of the council of ministers, in effect disregarding the vote of those with the right to elect their own representatives whether we agree or not.

After eight years at the PJIA, the director was removed because she had to be subjected to a screening after serving without any complaints. In some ways so designed because they know that with the unjust court case resulting from a prejudiced investigation launched eight years ago at the tourist office it would be impossible to pass the screening.

Then we learn of the director of the central bank of Curaçao and St. Maarten who held the position for almost thirty years and now must do a screening which of course he won’t pass for he too is being investigated. A respected inspector Thode has also felt the ferocity of the unfair and biased system after serving years at the coast guard and the government, and the court will have us believe that heading a high department in fraud and blue collar crime doesn’t afford one any consideration from screening.

We can only ask or reason what country secrets these good persons could learn of or divulge now that they couldn’t in the past eight or twenty years. And, if it is government’s intention to remove people from any office why they just don’t make them an offer to resign instead of creating all this negative press and destroying people’s character and professional identity.

Our government in its attempt to be truly transparent has yet to let us know what this screening entails for we hear of people failing without the possibility of facing their accuser(s) in court. Something isn’t kosher when a minister one time fails and passes the same screening afterwards. It goes to show that if people are allowed to defend themselves the madness will cease. We are left puzzled when we see what happened at Cadastre INS and even the National Detective department where one or more were disqualified for alleged irregularities and after 10-10-10- were again put at the same department.

And a question that figures highly is: Who is this person at VDSM, where is he from, and what does he know about St. Maarten, its customs and people? We are left to conclude that in an effort to be acceptable to what the European colonial master wants we are willing to criminalize and victimize our people as is clear in the recently implemented Afpak team of which we are so proud while arguing that the integrity chamber that proposed the same thing denying citizens their right to an impartial court is inhumane.

As we have tried to illustrate in previous articles we can’t build a country solely on the backs of outside input and impositions while exiling and excluding our own at all cause. The screening is too secretive, the conditions or prerequisites and who sets them are not clear and people should be offered an opportunity to challenge it. No one should get the impression that because we are a young country certain institutions like the prosecutor’s office and the VDSM among others are above the law.

Elton Jones