The much-anticipated Financial Action Task Force (FATF) mutual evaluation of the United Kingdom’s anti-money laundering and counter terror financing regime is out, and with it has come much praise from UK government officials, not least HM Treasury Minister John Glen, who said: “The report recognises that the UK’s AML/CTF regime is the strongest of the over sixty countries assessed by FATF and its regional bodies.”
Of the eleven areas under review, the UK received the highest possible rating in four areas, just as another four areas received a “substantial” rating.
Indeed the anti-money laundering global body did commend the UK. For example, it noted the role of its Joint Money Laundering Intelligence Taskforce which brings together law enforcement and industry in a partnership to share information and address financial crime issues.
FATF also praised the UK for its ‘robust’ understanding of ML/TF risks and mentioned its national coordination on AML/CFT, saying it has improved significantly since the last evaluation.
However, within a few days of the report’s publication, FATF’s conclusions have attracted criticism and raised some important questions, rather than answered them.
The Bond Anti-Corruption Group (the Bond Group) comprising three NGOs, Transparency International UK, Corruption Watch and Global Witness have been particularly strident in their assessment of the FATF report, as reflected in the following points:
Link to the full case study.
Count reading this article to your CPD minutes, by signing up to our CPD Wallet
FREE CPD Wallet