An appraisal of United Nations and other money laundering and financing of terrorism counter‐measures

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of the paper was to examine the challenges inherent in harnessing the UN and other AML counter‐measures, paying particular attention to the United Nations Resolutions on countering financing of terrorism and why the UN Security Resolutions have not been easy to invoke. As regards other AML counter‐measures, the paper examined the legal status of soft law instruments, articulating the possible reasons why they are easy to implement.Design/methodology/approachThe paper was written by the analysis of UN and other AML counter‐measures – which were evaluated in the gaze of how they have been implemented across states. While states are under an obligation to implement UN AML counter‐measures such as international treaties and soft law instruments, private banks as non‐state actors have exploited some loopholes in the law to flaunt them. This has undermined the efficacy of global AML counter‐measures. Many banks have been fined for violating UN sanctions on countries like Iran and Sudan. These examples were utilized in appraising the current UN and other AML counter‐measures across states.FindingsThe findings of the paper were compelling in demonstrating that global anti‐money laundering laws are often emasculated by the fact that they are implemented in the realm of international law. International law manifests itself within independent member states' vested strategic self‐interests. In the event of conflicts, national self‐interests will prevail. But again, money laundering is an opportunistic crime because it generates both synergies and externalities and the response of individual states often depends on how it is affected by it. It is wrong to assume as doing things in the realm of international law is not as easy as it is presumed to be.Research limitations/implicationsIt would have been better to carry out interviews so as to corroborate secondary data sources used in writing this paper. But due to some constraints, this option was not possible. It would also have been better to undertake the analysis of data based on a large sample of countries rather than cherry picking. While implementing AML counter‐measures in the realm of international law is necessary to foster international co‐operation, there are still some loopholes that need to be paid more attention.Originality/valueThe paper was written, analysed and evaluated based on the most recent literature on implementation of UN and other AML counter‐measures across countries. It also utilized the recent cases involving violations of UN AML counter‐measures by banks on sanctioned countries such as Iran and Sudan.