TORONTO, Canada – St Kitts and Nevis Prime Minister Terrance Drew is doing the right thing, in the fight against Caribbean CIP/CBI “illegal discounting” and “underselling” by identifying bad actors, administering punishment, and delivering the message that this depressing addiction is over.
In the leadership of St Kitts and Nevis, and the CIP/CBI progrmmme, Prime Minister Drew continues to manifest and set the tone for the region to follow. Ongoing reforms introduced by St Kitts and Nevis and replicated by other Caribbean CBI programs solidify trust, transparency, regional security and cohesion.
St Kitts and Nevis’s hardstands against ‘discounting and financing CBI schemes’ came to focus last week with legal notice per the “approved Public Good Infrastructure Project” relative to persons granted citizenship “paying less than the required investment.”
CIP insiders previously advised that “illegal discounting happened” and ostensively “continues”- albeit certain Caribbean CIP/CBI governments denied that, expecting to make a windfall from so-called CIP investments.
Unsurprisingly, Caribbean News Global (CNG) recommendations continue to manifest.
On January 29, 2024, Caribbean News Global (CNG) article entitled ‘Caribbean Countries’ CBI are yet again under EU scrutiny’ advised:
“The five Caribbean CBI countries that are committed to CBI in the region should organize as a bloc (syndicate, alliance) – Caribbean CBI countries – focused on the collective dimensions, benefits, risk factors and prospects for growth and development. “The results may very well provide the much-needed highly productive and mutually beneficial engagements that deliver safeguards to the prosperity of Caribbean CBI countries.”
Outcome!
– Memorandum-of-Agreement-CBIP-20-March-2024
—————————
July 30, 2024, CNG’s article, ‘Dominica deprives 68 CBI/CIP citizenships’ noted: “It was only a matter of time before Caribbean CBI/CIP countries deprived citizenships “obtained by means of fraud, false representation or the concealment of a material fact.”
“Caribbean CIP/CBI countries would have to voluntarily revoke and/or have international institutions and foreign governments act to protect national security, global financial institutions and visa-free programmes.”
“Moving forward on deprived citizenship/revocation requires the burden of proof to be presented, consequences extracted and penalties enforced.”
September 30, 2024, CNG’s article entitled ‘Caribbean CIP/CBI governments should allow recipients of CARICOM passports via ‘underselling schemes’ to rectify their files: Part 1 and 2.’
“It runs logical that respective Caribbean CIP/CBI governments (statutory bodies) and the regional CIP/CBI regulator (Interim Regulatory Commission (IRC) should offer recipients of CARICOM passports obtained via “underselling schemes” to rectify their files.”
“The time has come for acknowledgement of respective Caribbean CIP/CBI governments still in denial that “illegal discounting happened” and ostensively “continues” – identify the bad actors, administer punishment, and deliver the message that this depressing addiction is over.”
“Caribbean CIP/CBI governments should also extend the opportunity to message a 3-6 months window of good faith and a safe path to authenticate applicants’ certificates and receipts. Non-compliance will be subject to cancellation, revocation, and retrieval of revoked passports.”
Outcome!
On December 3, 2024, St Kitts and Nevis Ministry of National Security (MNS) issued legal notice “pursuant to application for citizenship based on an investment in an approved Public Good Infrastructure Project” who may have obtained citizenship via “discounted deals” – “CIP underselling” – paying less than the legally required investment, are at risk having their citizenship revoked. MNS advise to show proof of full and lawful payments and to pay any outstanding balance by December 31, 2024.
—————————
CIP/CBI underselling
In the fight against Caribbean CIP underselling, St Kitts and Nevis Prime Minister Dr Drew said earlier this year that he was prepared to “ take the necessary statutory steps and revoke citizenships obtained by fraud.”
In the fight to regularise Caribbean CIP/CBI underselling, fraud and white elephants that dot the region’s landscape, a complete and definitive audit of the programme is necessary, and assets return to the crown, for recapitalization and completion under a special mechanism.
In addition, recognizing the need and privilege to have Caribbean CIP/CBI citizenship and a CARICOM passport, experts contend that most “citizenships obtained by “discounted deals” – “CIP underselling” are likely to – Just pay the difference!
Forward guidance
The consequences of not rectifying CIP/CBI files and citizenships are not pleasant. The data and bio metrics will be accessible for years. A simple data mining and due diligence will reveal interesting information.
In the first instance, the concern CARICOM passport can be simply deactivated in the system. Second, citizenship will be revoked. Third, names of previous passport holders will appear in international databases, and, fourth, recipients will face the challenge of future visa, eta’s and/or passport applications and security documents to answer questions of revocations and renunciations.
Caribbean CIP/CBI may take the protective and management approach to have the difference that will amount to billions of dollars, remitted to a centralized account and paid via credit card. (The reason for this is better discussed in another forum, that adjudicates, the source of funds, degree of wealth, and burden of proof.)
In the application of extensive prescription in immigration/migration law, time is on the side of Caribbean CIP/CBI governments to execute the use of admissibility of an action. Acquiring or extinguishing a right by the mere passage of time is not applicable in this circumstance.
Conversely, Caribbean CIP/CBI governments and units (statutory board) should be cognisant to matters of naivety, burden of proof, and to whom it applies – in the “offering of discounting CBI prices,” that constitutes fraud and declared a crime.
Sovereignty matters
The sovereignty of any country has the power to govern itself and its subjects, in legal terms. Sovereignty has political, social and economic implications, free and independent, within its domain or sphere.
The concept that CIP/CBI programmes and that money collected by the developer/promoter from the sale/transaction for a designated project is that of the said and not the sovereign country; and that the [government] fees are what concerns the government and the ruling administration is mesmerizing at the very least.
Consider that the CIP/CBI programme is underpinned and guaranteed by a sovereign country and form part and parcel of the reward for investment in an approved development project or a donation to the country, that by agreement prompts approval and the issuance of citizenship and a passport. And whereas the country did not benefit in full from the construction activity and completion of the said project is a factor of whether social and economic gains were fulfilled and was the rule of law breached.
Sovereignty is a bedrock principle, albeit, it does not play out perfectly in reality.
As to the ethos, where an initial CIP/CBI project money/funds collected and has not materialized to complete the project is worthy of accessing the deprived value proposition are aspects of presumptive legality.
What constitutes a violation is up for interpretation as sovereignty lays out basic rules for how countries can narrate law and order, substantive to domestic sovereignty – interdependence sovereignty – and – international legal sovereignty.
In situations where the completed project is the remit of the sovereign country, all can be squared. And, in cases where the finished CIP/CBI project is an asset of the developer, primarily derived from state-sponsored citizenship and a passport, and accompanying business incentives, tax exemptions and concessions, (asset of a sovereign country), the extrapolation of perception and reality evades the degree of nuance.
The current challenges explain the temptation to any great conclusion, adverse to having CARICOM passports obtained via “underselling schemes” to rectify their files, and to – just pay the difference – to the sovereign country, are fitting to be restrained and argued in the realms of sovereignty.
Process and procedures
Safety and security are cornerstones that should pivot Caribbean CIP/CBI programmes. It is reasonable to consider that other OECS CIP/CBI programs will soon adopt St Kitts and Nevis – process and procedures – and dispatch similar legal notices to persons who are suspected and/or with summarised evidence obtain citizenship and payed less than the legal minimum investment.
The matter of due diligence, dealing with reputable agents and developers is of most importance to the integrity of CIP/CBI programmes and to comply with the global investment environment and international travel concerns.
Considering the volume of CIP applications and contract terms that submit or cause to be submitted in some cases 200 plus per month for example – summarise that in the due diligence process, something (s) are liable to be missed and/or glossed over.
Caribbean News Global (CNG) reiterates: “First, the recommendation is to up-skilled techniques and modern procedures of the due diligence unit. Second, the unit should be a separate body, independent from CIP operational and legislative jurisdiction; and third, completely out of the line minister portfolio.”
Subject to Caribbean CIP/CBI – CARICOM passport holders incapable of complying with MNS, December 30, 2024, legal notice, immigration officers may have a field day scrutinizing CARICOM passports. Likewise, as already, the continued attrition and willful desertion of agents, consultants and bad actors seem inevitable.
It remains to be seen what the regional CIP/CBI regulator (Interim Regulatory Commission (IRC) to be established in the second half of 2025 with adjudicate “usefulness” that is “fit for purpose.”
In the interim, it is said that Caribbean CIP/CBI governments are scrambling to replicate the legal and corrective actions taken by St Kitts and Nevis; or face push-back from external intermediaries to proceed dispatching compliance letters with due swiftness.
