What's new

Update of FATF Meeting: Outcomes FATF Plenary, 21-23 February 2018

There's plenty of confusion around and media in both countries are not helping to clarify things.

I know this is from an Indian source, but the first paragraph help clarify things:

http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...-90-day-reprieve-from-fatf-grey-list-5073330/



Yes, Pakistan was not put on gray list by FATF at this time, but it will review the report by APG in 90 days on what further action to take.

That does make some sense.It's a pity others don't get it.
@cloud4000 I see this being drawn out for a while.

It is certainly blowing up smoke over your peshwa *** and we can clearly see the smoke all the way here.

"https://twitter.com/hashtag/FATF?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc^tfw">
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

FATF spokesperson says organisation not responsible for media reports pertaining to Pakistan’s inclusion to the list

https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2018/02/23/pakistan-not-on-fatf-grey-list/

Don't bother he's asking people how they "research". If he lacks the initiative to do something like that I don't know why he even posts.....
 
.
Pakistan to go on FATF terror financing list in June
By Shahbaz Rana
Published: February 24, 2018
13SHARES
SHARE TWEET EMAIL
1643185-fatf-1519412584-232-640x480.png

Senior officials claim FATF did not follow own procedure, try to downplay negative impact of listing. PHOTO COURTESY: FATF

ISLAMABAD: The Financial Action Task Force on Friday decided to place Pakistan back on its terror financing watch-list on a list of countries that financially aid terrorism with effect from June but Islamabad believed the decision was politically motivated that may affect its future cooperation.

Despite initially agreeing to Pakistan’s viewpoint, the FATF Plenary decided to place the country on the Grey List from June, confirmed a senior government official who attended FATF meetings in Paris, France. Pakistan was previously on the Grey List from 2012 to 2015.

The federal government does not see any major impact of the FATF’s decision on its economy and the country’s de-facto finance minister said that during 2012 to 2015 period, Pakistan signed agreements with the International Monetary Fund and issued sovereign bonds in international capital markets.

Sources claim Pakistan back on FATF watch-list, govt says no ‘official intimation’ yet

Pakistan’s financial system was strong and its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing regimes were among the most stringent in the world, said Dr Miftah Ismail.

The decision is seen as being against the norms of the FATF and its sister organisations, as the country’s Mutual Evaluation – a process of assessing levels of implementation of FATF recommendations, was currently undergoing.

The Mutual Evaluations also provide an in-depth description and analysis of each country’s system for preventing criminal abuse of the financial system.

The decision to place a member country on the FATF list is usually taken in light of the Mutual Evaluation, so FATF’s latest move suggests that Pakistan was falling victim to international politics, government officials said while requesting anonymity.

“Pakistan has serious concerns and objections to the introduction of this new nomination procedure, which is unprecedented and in clear violation of the established rules and practices of FATF”, the FO spokesman said on Friday.

Most of the concerns raised by the US regarding deficiencies in our Counter Financing Terrorism and Anti money laundering regime had already been addressed in 2015, when Pakistan was taken off the “grey list”.

Where from here

Now, FATF would require Pakistan to submit an Action Plan in May in order to be removed from the list in the coming months or years. Once the FATF approves this Action Plan in June, there will be a formal announcement from FATF about placing Pakistan on the Grey List.

If Pakistan fails to submit a plan, the FATF has the option of placing the country on its Black List, which carries adverse implications. This limits Pakistan’s ability to decide whether it should cooperate with the FATF or not due to the global body’s ‘unjust decision’.

The US and UK jointly submitted a resolution to the FATF nominating Pakistan for placement in the Grey List. France and Germany subsequently joined this nomination.

Reforms issues

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is the global standard setting body for anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT).

About two and half years ago, the global body had struck off Pakistan’s name after the country agreed to take actions against Hafiz Saeed’s Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) and the Falah-e-Insaniyat Foundation (FIF) and Lashakar Tayiba.

However, some of these actions remained pending, and Pakistan only finished checking the off about two months ago. During the International Country Risk Guide (ICRG) session that took place a day before FATF plenary, some member countries had raised the question that there was no analysis available to judge Pakistan’s action, said the officials.

Upon this Adviser to Prime Minister on Finance Dr Miftah Ismail offered that Pakistan was ready to submit a report on its action plan and after that the FATF should take the decision, the officials said. At that point, Japan supported Pakistan’s view that action should be taken on the basis of the evidence.

The ICRG agreed to this proposal that Pakistan would take certain measures to address the international community’s concerns and in light of those measures the FATF should take steps in future, according to the officials.

China also advised Pakistan to sign an agreement with the FATF on the measures that it would take in next three months, said the officials.

The pre plenary meeting ended on this positive note and this was also the reason behind Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif’s tweet in which he announced that FATF deferred the decision for three months and asked the Asia Pacific Group for another report on Pakistan, according to the officials.

However, to the surprise of Pakistani authorities, the US used its influence and turned the tables on Pakistan by influencing the other countries and to have them to first analyze the actions that Pakistan has already taken, according to the people who attended the meeting.

The FATF decided to place Pakistan on the grey list on the undue pressure from the United States, according to Pakistani authorities. They claim that during the meeting when the representative of Gulf Cooperation Council raised hand to speak, the US representative rushed to the GCC seat and asked the representative not to speak, according to the officials.

The FATF decision, which is against its norms, could frustrate Pakistan’s genuine efforts and the government will decide whether it should cooperate with a global body that is playing in the hands of the US, said the Pakistani authorities.

The officials said that the only weak area was that Pakistani courts were convicting terrorists but were not imposing fines on them on charges of terrorism financing.

Tweet too soon

On February 20, Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif had claimed on Twitter that there was no consensus for nominating Pakistan for listing, and that a three-month pause had been proposed. He also said that listing would be reconsidered in June.

Foreign analysts suggested that the late push against Pakistan may have been provoked by the leaking of information from the FATF meeting, with some pointing specifically to Asif’s tweet.

--------------------
Diff news sources diff versions ........
 
.
There's plenty of confusion around and media in both countries are not helping to clarify things.

I know this is from an Indian source, but the first paragraph help clarify things:

http://indianexpress.com/article/wo...-90-day-reprieve-from-fatf-grey-list-5073330/



Yes, Pakistan was not put on gray list by FATF at this time, but it will review the report by APG in 90 days on what further action to take.

My friend they review every country after 90 days that is the job of that organization.
 
. .
No I'll make it clear for you i.e. going to the organisation itself and seeing what they have written or said, none of which correlates with what you're saying here. How hard was that?
Yes it is a closed meeting, but the outcomes have just come out, you didn't read them above?
Or shall I just take your word for it that something very secretive has happened?
Seriously do you even read what you write? :rolleyes:

And what have I written that would make you question my stand? Have I provided any opinion on the verdict of FATF? No!
My entire premise was around ethical journalism and that some news publications are more reputable than others (but not beyond human error)
I’m some cases you can verify (FATF) others you can’t. In which case, your “research” would be like blind leading the blind. So how do you verify these events? Like say the happenings in a war zone?

Read my original response to you and read that in context.

It is certainly blowing up smoke over your peshwa *** and we can clearly see the smoke all the way here.


FATF spokesperson says organisation not responsible for media reports pertaining to Pakistan’s inclusion to the list

https://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2018/02/23/pakistan-not-on-fatf-grey-list/

Not sure what’s crawling up your ***, but I’m not interested.
Go play the annoying kid with someone else.
 
.
Pakistan to go on FATF terror financing list in June
By Shahbaz Rana
Published: February 24, 2018
13SHARES
SHARE TWEET EMAIL
1643185-fatf-1519412584-232-640x480.png

Senior officials claim FATF did not follow own procedure, try to downplay negative impact of listing. PHOTO COURTESY: FATF

ISLAMABAD: The Financial Action Task Force on Friday decided to place Pakistan back on its terror financing watch-list on a list of countries that financially aid terrorism with effect from June but Islamabad believed the decision was politically motivated that may affect its future cooperation.

Despite initially agreeing to Pakistan’s viewpoint, the FATF Plenary decided to place the country on the Grey List from June, confirmed a senior government official who attended FATF meetings in Paris, France. Pakistan was previously on the Grey List from 2012 to 2015.

The federal government does not see any major impact of the FATF’s decision on its economy and the country’s de-facto finance minister said that during 2012 to 2015 period, Pakistan signed agreements with the International Monetary Fund and issued sovereign bonds in international capital markets.

Sources claim Pakistan back on FATF watch-list, govt says no ‘official intimation’ yet

Pakistan’s financial system was strong and its anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing regimes were among the most stringent in the world, said Dr Miftah Ismail.

The decision is seen as being against the norms of the FATF and its sister organisations, as the country’s Mutual Evaluation – a process of assessing levels of implementation of FATF recommendations, was currently undergoing.

The Mutual Evaluations also provide an in-depth description and analysis of each country’s system for preventing criminal abuse of the financial system.

The decision to place a member country on the FATF list is usually taken in light of the Mutual Evaluation, so FATF’s latest move suggests that Pakistan was falling victim to international politics, government officials said while requesting anonymity.

“Pakistan has serious concerns and objections to the introduction of this new nomination procedure, which is unprecedented and in clear violation of the established rules and practices of FATF”, the FO spokesman said on Friday.

Most of the concerns raised by the US regarding deficiencies in our Counter Financing Terrorism and Anti money laundering regime had already been addressed in 2015, when Pakistan was taken off the “grey list”.

Where from here

Now, FATF would require Pakistan to submit an Action Plan in May in order to be removed from the list in the coming months or years. Once the FATF approves this Action Plan in June, there will be a formal announcement from FATF about placing Pakistan on the Grey List.

If Pakistan fails to submit a plan, the FATF has the option of placing the country on its Black List, which carries adverse implications. This limits Pakistan’s ability to decide whether it should cooperate with the FATF or not due to the global body’s ‘unjust decision’.

The US and UK jointly submitted a resolution to the FATF nominating Pakistan for placement in the Grey List. France and Germany subsequently joined this nomination.

Reforms issues

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is the global standard setting body for anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT).

About two and half years ago, the global body had struck off Pakistan’s name after the country agreed to take actions against Hafiz Saeed’s Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) and the Falah-e-Insaniyat Foundation (FIF) and Lashakar Tayiba.

However, some of these actions remained pending, and Pakistan only finished checking the off about two months ago. During the International Country Risk Guide (ICRG) session that took place a day before FATF plenary, some member countries had raised the question that there was no analysis available to judge Pakistan’s action, said the officials.

Upon this Adviser to Prime Minister on Finance Dr Miftah Ismail offered that Pakistan was ready to submit a report on its action plan and after that the FATF should take the decision, the officials said. At that point, Japan supported Pakistan’s view that action should be taken on the basis of the evidence.

The ICRG agreed to this proposal that Pakistan would take certain measures to address the international community’s concerns and in light of those measures the FATF should take steps in future, according to the officials.

China also advised Pakistan to sign an agreement with the FATF on the measures that it would take in next three months, said the officials.

The pre plenary meeting ended on this positive note and this was also the reason behind Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif’s tweet in which he announced that FATF deferred the decision for three months and asked the Asia Pacific Group for another report on Pakistan, according to the officials.

However, to the surprise of Pakistani authorities, the US used its influence and turned the tables on Pakistan by influencing the other countries and to have them to first analyze the actions that Pakistan has already taken, according to the people who attended the meeting.

The FATF decided to place Pakistan on the grey list on the undue pressure from the United States, according to Pakistani authorities. They claim that during the meeting when the representative of Gulf Cooperation Council raised hand to speak, the US representative rushed to the GCC seat and asked the representative not to speak, according to the officials.

The FATF decision, which is against its norms, could frustrate Pakistan’s genuine efforts and the government will decide whether it should cooperate with a global body that is playing in the hands of the US, said the Pakistani authorities.

The officials said that the only weak area was that Pakistani courts were convicting terrorists but were not imposing fines on them on charges of terrorism financing.

Tweet too soon

On February 20, Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif had claimed on Twitter that there was no consensus for nominating Pakistan for listing, and that a three-month pause had been proposed. He also said that listing would be reconsidered in June.

Foreign analysts suggested that the late push against Pakistan may have been provoked by the leaking of information from the FATF meeting, with some pointing specifically to Asif’s tweet.

--------------------
Diff news sources diff versions ........
I would read it as "Pakistan to go on FATF terror financing list in June 2118". If do they anything before 2118, i'll just give a shit to them all!
 
.
And what have I written that would make you question my stand? Have I provided any opinion on the verdict of FATF? No!
My entire premise was around ethical journalism and that some news publications are more reputable than others (but not beyond human error)
I’m some cases you can verify (FATF) others you can’t. In which case, your “research” would be like blind leading the blind.
Read my original response to you and read that in context.

You're not making sense and just writing for the sake of it now.
The FATF didn't come out with anything along the lines the articles did, the same articles I questioned which you then said I was doing so because they were negative about Pakistan. I simply went to the organisation and found out the truth, where as you were content with defending the slap that was presented in the previous pages. See research!
Now go engage with someone else, blind leading the blind indeed.
 
. .
You are like Khawaja Asif of PDF. Lets hope you fall right.
And what did Khwaja Asif say that falls into any category of wrong? Khwaja Asif already talked about the same reprieve for three months which is a technical procedure simple as that.
 
.
You're not making sense and just writing for the sake of it now.
Not my problem if you can’t seperate the argument I’m making from your pre conceived notion about my intentions.

The FATF didn't come out with anything along the lines the articles did, the same articles I questioned which you then said I was doing so because they were negative about Pakistan.

More misinterpretation.
My statement was to question if you verify through “research” each and every piece of news that’s posted or does that only apply to negative news about Pakistan?
At some point, it’s beyond your research capabilities to verify authenticity (FATF being not one of them) at which point one must rely on reputable news sources. And some like WSJ and NYTimes are more reputable and prone to fewer mistakes due to their editorial practices. Period!

That’s the extent of my argument.
Nowhere did I post my opinion on the outcome of FATF

Now you’re just angry and projecting your frustration from conversation with other posters on me.
My point stands. Whether you like it or not.
 
.
@Enigma_ now check this one...you were hopelessly falling for the false propaganda and letting your brain turn into a pressure cooker. That is why we have been advised to verify a news if a liar or enemy brings to us.
Jahil kaum ha India. Hope they all burn in hell. I apologise unconditionally to all for my previous emotional outburst. My hot headedness got the better of me. I am still very confused to as what's actually happening. Conflicting reports all around.
 
Last edited:
.
FATF has finally announced the outcome and public statement. As announced on FATF’s official website, the documents do not carry Pakistan’s name.
Not sure what’s crawling up your ***, but I’m not interested.
Go play the annoying kid with someone else.
Oh but we all are sure what's crawling at your end, pun intended.

A grey list worth rolling and putting back in the crevice it came out of in the first place:bunny:, a wish from our friends across the border to be delivered via Trump with love but it got blocked anyway. So I guess our friends shall stay constipated for three months for now - must be painful indeed and hence the cries of pain here.

FATF grey list is a matter of - been there done that - for Pakistan and nothing new other than its significance as another politically motivated financial arm twisting tactic of putting pressure on Pakistan by Trump administration.

Having the government of a money laundering, Kulbhushan loving, virtually mute on foreign affairs, former PMs political party in power might also have something to do with our latest predicament and not terror financing. It is hard to decide either way In the absence of any official word on it.
Only Time will tell.
 
.
Not my problem if you can’t seperate the argument I’m making from your pre conceived notion about my intentions.



More misinterpretation.
My statement was to question if you verify through “research” each and every piece of news that’s posted or does that only apply to negative news about Pakistan?
At some point, it’s beyond your research capabilities at which point one must rely on reputable news sources. And some like WSJ and NYTimes are more reputable and prone to fewer mistakes due to their editorial practices. Period!

That’s the extent of my argument.
Nowhere did I post my opinion on the outcome of FATF

Now you’re just angry and projecting your frustration from conversation with other posters on me.
My point stands. Whether you like it or not.

I just got proved right regarding the FATF which was the original point regarding me questioning the articles.
I'm not angry at all, I'm actually laughing whilst I'm replying to you.
At least the others said let's wait but you kept on pushing the whole angle that my research skills weren't up to scratch regarding this whole issue. I just showed you they were.
 
.
Wth is going on??? Shame on the FAFT for not being clear.
 
.
I just got proved right regarding the FATF which was the original point regarding me questioning the articles.
I'm not angry at all, I'm actually laughing whilst I'm replying to you.
At least the others said let's wait but you kept on pushing the whole angle that my research skills weren't up to scratch regarding this whole issue. I just showed you they were.

Clearly you’re not reading everything i write.
I have not once stated my opinion on anything about FATF. My argument was very simple and broad about some news publications being more reliable than others. The rest is you reading between the lines.

For news that cannot be verified by an official website (as in the case of FATF), how do you authenticate the veracity of what’s being reported? Example being the happenings in a war zone.
Do you sit and question every piece of news that hits your screen? I doubt it.



Here is my original response to you..
Yes they can, for that matter anyone can. It’s only human.

But a reputable newspaper, the likes of NY times and WSJ do not just allow journalists to post willy nilly.
There is a process of vetting the sources, editorial screening etc before the news is even published.

Not saying that mistakes don’t happen, but with reputable sources, the chances are greatly reduced.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom