Reply to "Court rules in favour of wrongfully dismissed NBS boss – orders compensation"

antabanta posted: 

I'm glad you found a straw to cling to and facilitate your return to the discussion. So what you're saying is that instead of my experience at NBS establishing my superior knowledge of the business and its operations, it makes me a crook. Is this true of all current and former employees of NBS or only those who call your BS? Please provide documentation on the series of steps that have to be taken for flagged powers of attorney transactions. The purpose of a power of attorney is to replace the grantor with the grantee because of the unavailability of the grantor. What should the financial institution do if the grantor is not reachable (which is the reason for the power of attorney in the first place?) If "seem to be in order" is not enough due diligence, is "in order' enough?

You would see ample evidence of Jagdeo's involvement, if only you would remove your blinds. Or maybe you are aware of it and received a little something from the transactions. You were visiting Guyana a lot during Jagdeo's reign... right?

As I stated before, after the Arjoon fraud, NBS implemented the necessary procedure to prevent such future crimes. Arjoon was vindicated on a technicality that the policies regarding power attorney fraud did not exist in writing. 

Can you expand on your role at NBS? This will shed light on whether you are a BSer or just covering your tracks in the involvement in this crime.

BTW I have no political connection in Guyana nor was ever acquainted with Jagdeo. 

The Court opined that it could be safe to say that at the time of the withdrawal, systems were not in place.
“The failures, gaps and omissions were therefore systematic and not to be attributed to the officer that sat at the pinnacle of the chain of command.” The Court therefore declared that the system ought to have been better enforced.