Prime Minister Owen Arthur Can Prove His Innocence In The Cheque Affair With The Help Of His Bank Manager At FCIB

In the tradition of his wind-up remarks in the annual “Budget” debate on Friday night, Prime Minister Owen Arthur injected a personal assault on Opposition Leader David Thompson. After a number of exchanges and counter-accusations between the two, Mr Thompson then asked Mr Arthur to explain the circumstances surrounding a cheque payable to the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) in an amount which exceeded a political candidate’s statutory limitations, and which was allegedly deposited to his account at a bank in Speightstown, St Peter.

In responding, Mr Arthur admitted personal receipt of a cheque which he said had been endorsed and deposited to the BLP’s account. He in turn asked Mr Thompson to reveal what sum had been given to the DLP by CLICO, a corporate name long alleged to be funding that party.

Read Full Nation Article

Much has been said and written about the clash between Arthur and Thompson at the wind-up of the budget debate earlier this year. BU, in one of its earlier commentary said, it was the first time in Arthur’s career that he stumbled in any parliamentary debate. It was also Thompson’s first time, after having numerous encounters with the Prime Minister, that he was able to deliver an uppercut, which knocked the wind out of Arthur. It is BU’s view that Arthur is still wounded. After reading a document in the Financial Times this week, it triggered the motivation to write this piece. BU wish to thank that special person who assisted in the preparation of this piece!

A warning to Opposition Leader David Thompson… never underestimate a wounded political animal.

We have read over at Barbados Free Press, and our sources have indicated that the cheque Arthur deposited to an account, which he has at First Caribbean International Bank, was a very large sum indeed. Those who should know about these things are whispering the figure of USD750, 000.00+. We have reported in another article that we’ve been advised by our sources that depositing donations to the accounts of the candidates is a common practice. At some point, the candidate will transfer those monies into the party account. The observation to be made is, how accurate can this practice be?

It concerns BU a great deal that a disclosure of this magnitude could be made in a country, which boasts of an education system that has produced a “literate” population of over 90+%. Where is the media, what about the many groups in the society that claim to be the protector of the people, the lawyers who should be concerned with justice, the Church? The disclosure having been made in the highest chamber in the land makes the silence of the society much difficult to accept. We have become a society so fattened with self-interest that we have become numbed to the irregularities of our directorate. BU should emphasize that this current state spans political, civil service, private enterprise and non-government organizations; in other words, it spans the full spectrum of our society.

Enough of the preamble!

After the tragedy of 911, the USA became consumed with how funds were being used to finance terrorists’ activities around the world. The USA passed the US Patriot Act, which requires US financial institutions to focus on the reporting of financial transactions to detect the financing of terrorism and money laundering activities. Because financial institutions have to do business with banks in the USA, it means that the Patriot Act has had global implications. Arising, we have seen the creation of Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) established by countries around the world to share information, which ensure that criminals who use money for illegal activity can be traced.

Stay with BU folks, we are getting there.

To ensure that the FIUs track monies deposited in the financial sector, deposits of $10,000.00 and greater must be accompanied by a document called the Declaration of Source of Funds/Wealth. Preferential customers are usually given higher limits, which allow the bank to wave the requirement of submitting the document. For example, lawyers and real estate agents who deal in large financial transactions are given bigger limits so that they can avoid the hassle of completing many forms-see below. BU would imagine that for customers to get their limits increase, they would have to satisfy the banks of their credibility in business.


The Declaration of Source of Funds/Wealth form requires the source of the funds deposited; if the source is not provided, the bank receiving the deposit must approve the transaction. Now this is where it gets interesting. BU is proceeding on the basis that the cheque deposited by Arthur was $750,000.00 plus. It is unlikely that Prime Minister Arthur, whose annual salary is around $200,000, would have need for the bank to assign a deposit greater than $750,000.00. BU conclude that the Prime Minister, to comply with the laws of Barbados, should have been required to complete the Declaration of Source of Funds/Wealth Form by his bank manager. If by chance Arthur used the aura of his office to intimidate his banker by not completing the form, the bank would have had a duty to treat the transaction as suspicious. In such case, the form should have been completed by the bank and submitted to the FIU in Barbados for their attention.

So, let BU paint the options available in this transaction as we understand them. BU readers can feel free to question our suppositions.

Scenario 1: Prime Minister completed the Declaration of Source of Funds/Wealth form; he recorded that the source of funds was from a party contributor, stating the name of course. We would imagine that Arthur could have declared that the funds were deposited to his personal account at FCIB and transferred, maybe next day to the party account. This position although believable is still questionable because a donation of $750,000.00 should have required our Prime Minister to ask the donor to make the cheque payable to the Barbados Labour Party. Seem the common sense thing to do!

Scenario 2: Prime Minister did not complete the Declaration of Source of Funds/Wealth form, in which case FCIB would have completed the form on his behalf, and the bank manager would have approved the transaction. The question at this point is whether the bank manager completed the form. BU suspect that the Prime Minister of Barbados, Primus inter pares is often not expected to complete routine acts like completing forms!

So where does this leave us?

In Scenario 1: The Declaration of Source Funds Form was completed. The Prime Minister can ask the FCIB bank manager for a copy of the form. BU suspect that Barbadians may be interested in the “source of funds” but also the length of time it took to transfer the funds from his personal account to the BLP party account.

In Scenario 2: The role of FCIB comes under the microscope. If the Prime Minister did not/refused to complete the Declaration of Source/Wealth form, what action did the bank take, if any? A Prime Minister working for $200,000.00 annually, and deposits a cheque for $750,000.00 should trigger some questions from his banker. Is this a case of the bank breaking the anti-money laundering laws of Barbados by not following the guidelines? Is there a possibility that there might have been collusion? All things considered, if the Prime Minister has done a transaction, which is above board, then it becomes a simple matter, and here is the question Prime Minister Arthur.

Did you complete the Declaration of Source Funds Form and if so, what did you record as the source of the funds on the form? If the Prime Minister recorded the source of funds as BLP party contributor, then the Prime Minister is INNOCENT. Prime Minister! BU and all of our readers, who currently number in the thousands, wait for your response.

Related Stories:

Prime Minister Arthur Should Resign

Prime Minister The Master Of Spin~Does Anyone Feel Dizzy?

David Thompson Has Owen By The “Balls”~When Will He Squeeze?

26 thoughts on “Prime Minister Owen Arthur Can Prove His Innocence In The Cheque Affair With The Help Of His Bank Manager At FCIB

  1. Do you really think the full truth on this will ever emerge? Come on, David, you’re not living in La La Land! A whole set of dipsy-doodling will already have taken place and Owing will have covered his tracks and will come out smelling like roses (or smirking like a drunken fool).

  2. What the @#*%* I hearing though?

    Today in the Nation newspaper I read David Thompson saying that there will be a commission of inquiry into the action of the BLP.

    What *#@!* this man getting on with,yuh mean to tell muh dat he ain’t hear the people saying the doan want no more wasted money on ‘useless commisions of inquiry’?

    Over and over the people have been saying they want criminal investigations,forensic audits and the like which will in quick time investigate with a view to prosecution,

    What the shite we need commision of inquiries for?

    You better get wid de programme David – or you will find de going rough.

  3. Pingback: Did Prime Minister Owen Arthur Fill Out The Proper Anti-Money Laundering Form? « Barbados Free Press

  4. Owen Arthur should get no less than 60 years hard labour,for raping this countries treasury,selling off prime agriculture land and pocketing said funds in personal offshore bank accounts,the truth is out Arthur don’t make it any worse for yourself.

  5. I would like to know into what kind of an account, whether interest or non-interest, the $$ intended for the “Party Account” were deposited by King Arthur. If it were an interest bearing account, was the interest transferred with the $$, or did King Arthur considered himself entitled to the interest. What is the interest on that amount of $$, and how long did it stay in his account before being transferred?

    It would not come as a surprise to me if King Arthur transferred the principal only. Go King Arthur — you were not elected to run the country/given the title of Prime Minister for nothing. Whew. But, please don’t forget that Day runs until Nite catches it. You may be more familiar with this, “you can hide and buy land, but you can’t hide to wuk it up.”

  6. “Owen Arthur should get no less than 60 years hard labour for raping this countries treasury, selling off prime agriculture land and pocketing said funds in personal offshore bank accounts. The truth is out Arthur; don’t make it any worse for yourself.”

    For King Arthur to be brought to his knees, the mind set of Barbadian citizens have to change — stop thinking of being afraid to expose, embarass from top-down; until then, things will remain the same and people will suffer at the hands of their head hunchos.

  7. This will be a very tough election for the dlp to win if only because of the extent of the money available to the blp, when one considers the vast sums already extracted and being held in overseas accounts it is mind boggling indeed, but secondly the need to win has never been greater for any political party.
    Purely because these ones know the extent of their corruption and mega stealing that has taken place and they will fight tooth and nail to regain power to pervent themselves from being exposed for what they are crooks.
    And worst yet to actually face charges of corruption and stealing from the treasury.

  8. Thanks BU for this report. After reading this report I called the Central Bank of barbados and was told nobody is exempted from filling out that form,even the PM.

  9. FCIB should be investigated as a matter of urgency.

    Nobody can’t tell me that is the first cheque of that magnitude, passed through that bank by Mr. Arthur. Then again kisses go by favour.

    If it so and they have not done the right thing then, they creditability, and integrity rate should go from 2 to -0.

    Mr. After is going to do to this country what the Birds did to Antigua, and when they are run out of office sometime this year or next year, they will burn, shred and “disappear” files that are relevant to their incarceration.

    The hurtful thing is that they are “ordinary” Barbadians who have the skivvy on these ppl and would not photo copy or photograph an incriminating document to make sure that all of those Cabinet Ministers and a few of the Senators spend their life behind bars.

    Fill out form my left foot.

  10. WHy don’t you tell us how much the PM settled with hus ex-wife in the divorce suit. Was it more than ten years of his salary? How could he afford it on 150k per year, whilst still renovating his house, starting a new family and having a daughter in a US university?

    No wonder Lynch and Mia can get away with their own expensive lifestyles

  11. Peter Piper~At BU we are not lawyers but you should understand that a divorce can be decreed by the courts of Barbados but settlement can follow 🙂

  12. I agree that commission of enquiry cannot be enough to get to the tiefing of the BLP, but there is still room for them, if done properly and reports delivered to the people in good time. Forensic audits are of course good but also expensive.

    The amount of money that BLP politicians extract from Businesses is mind boggling. I do not know what figure that Owen confessed to, but it had to be substantial to knock him down like I saw on TV.

    Owen is alleged to have granted his former wife $3,000,000.00 plus the construction of the Large House in Gibbs, St. Peter. He is a Multi-millionaire. How he got his funds is any person’s guess? It is alleged that it is approaching $35, ooo, 000.00. You all will never find out his true wealth nor the wealth of his Ministers or other Owen minions. They have it hidden well. You know something else, there will be 10000’s of Barbadians who will not accept that your leaders and governors will steal and misappropriate as much as this current lot. The society likes these criminals.

  13. i carrying flowers for him next budget day to make sure he know my name and maybe i could get a little “hand out”

  14. Nice photo BU.

    Owen Arthur really looks like a common Cheshire cat after tieffing his last meal !

    A meal worth $ 750,000.00 !

  15. Thistle And you really believe that would stop him from drinking it??
    You got to be kidding me when the see thru kick in he would never know the difference anyway.
    Drunkard and crook !!!

  16. Well the blp are so into the stealing that they are even promoting stealing on their website.
    I visited there earlier today and I burst my guts laughing when I saw on their site where they have the google map there is caption STEAL THIS MAP it nearly killed me when you realise the level of corruption and the mention come steal this map it is an invasive sickness this thing called corruption.

  17. All this talk wunna talking Owen gine buy some votes,make sure the guyanese vote(probably sorry he ain’t got in more Chinese)legal or illegal ones, win back this government,send Barbados through the eddoes and relax on his yacht with Dale Marshall while laughing all the way to the bank.(offshore bank that is)

  18. Prime Minister Arthur is an honest man. I am sure that he will disclose the source of these funds before the next election. The Prime Minister is too intelligent to leave a messy paper trail. If there is one it will be clear and clean.

    Why would the Prime Minister accept questionable, traceable funds when he has dedicated, loyal persons like Hallam Nicholls to do so? He trusts Hallam with the cash so why not the cheques?

    The Prime Minister would remember the case of the contribution to the St. Peter Development fund from Mr. Smith at Port St. Charles. This cheque was picked up by a messenger who innocently handed it to his superiors. A cheque that was intended for the P.M’s campaign was therefore redirected. Mr. Arthur is too smart to allow another mistake like this.

  19. Pingback: The Hidden Truth Behind Political Campaign Financing In Barbados «

  20. Pingback: » US Govt. - Barbados Banks Can’t Stop Drug Dealers’ Money Laundering! Keltruth Corp.: News Blog of Keltruth Corp. - Miami, Florida, USA.

Leave a comment, join the discussion.