Counter terrorism measures and NPOs Why should we care? Hanna Surmatz, 2016 Hanna Surmatz, 2016
Shrinking Space for Civil Society Increasing trend of restrictions What is the motivation for governments? • Governments concerned about civil unrest • Control foreign funding flows / state sovereignity • Enhance aid effectiveness for development aid • Business interests • Fighting money laundering and financing of terrorism
What is FATF ? • Inter-governmental body, established by G7 in 1989 • 36 Member States (and EC) with 22 observers • One year presidencies: Now South Korea – end June Spain • International standard setter for fight against ML and TF • Mutual Evaluations/Peer Reviews – non compliance negative impact on countries • Not a legislator but a very powerful global framework setter!
What makes the FATF policy framework? 40 recommendations endorsed by over 180 countries Recommendation 8 on NPOs: NPOs are “particularly” vulnerable and countries should review adequacy of laws to ensure no abuse happens
What makes the FATF policy framework? The R8 interpretative Note (IN) Recommended measures for countries according to IN: Domestic reviews of NPO sector Outreach to the sector Supervision or monitoring Effective information gathering & investigation Capacity to respond to international information requests
Does FATF know the NPO sector? • Delegations involved in FATF are mainly made up of civil servants from Treasury, Police and other law enforcement agencies, Financial Intelligence Units, Tax authorities, Home Affairs. • Only two Governments currently have NPO regulators (Canada and UK)
Where does FATF draw justification for targeting NPOs? • Typologies report (2014) – 102 cases of NPO abuse Key Findings include: • The NPO sector has interconnected vulnerabilities, and terrorist entities seek to exploit more than one type of vulnerability • Different risks at sectoral and organisational level • The NPOs most at risk appear to be those engaged in ‘service’ activities, and that operate in a close proximity to an active terrorist threat • National and regional (EU) risk assessments cover also NPO risks Abuse happens but actual number of abuse cases very low
Implications for civil society? • Recipe for overbroad civil society regulations in some cases • With current evaluation system, countries want to be compliant • Or restrict the sector – so used as justification • Registration procedures, reporting requirements, due diligence controls, etc. • Banks are becoming more risk averse • Less funding to certain regions • Affects both human rights and development actors
What are we/NPOs doing? • NPO coalition to advocate for change (under lead of ECNL, EFC, HSC and CSN) - online platform: http://fatfplatform.org • Seeking reform of R8 regime and influencing policy: • More engagement of NPOs at national level in risk assessment and FATF evaluation processes (NPO coalition created guidance for NPOs) • Change of Best Practice paper in 2015 • Formalize dialogue between FATF and NPOs (announced at June 2015 Plenary) • Revision of R8 Interpretative Note in line with a risk based approach – FATF did online consultation with NPO sector • Revision of R8 itself – NPO coalition organized sign on letter to FATF President
Review of guidance The 2015 revised R8 Best Practice Paper (BPP) Guidelines for governments on how to implement Recommendation 8 NEW – • counter-terrorism measures should not apply to the entire NPO sector (since not all NPOs are at risk of abuse) • government over-regulation of the NPO sector is not a desirable outcome of implementing the FATF standards. • importance of outreach to NPOs and regular dialogue to develop collaborative relationship is emphasised.
Review of R8 IN and R8 • FATF held online consultation and a one day consultation with NPOs in April – draft revised R8 Interpretative Note • Following April consultation meeting, an online consultation took place on revision of R8 itself • NPO coalition now asked to receive revised draft texts of R8 and R8 IN – decision expected at June plenary!
How can you get involved? • Join the NPO coalition and encourage your clients to join • Disseminating information / get statements signed by many organisations etc • Research, alert and report /as information hubs / gather stories from different members on effects on the ground / help monitor developments / comparative perspective; • Advocacy at national and global level / access to policy makers / advocacy outreach capacity
Next steps • June 2016 – Plenary • Then, ensuring matching up methodology update for Mutual Evaluations – following finalised IN and R8
Evaluations All countries up for evaluation – list on FATF website 1. One/two years ahead on-site visit - National / NPO risk assessment? - Targeted approach / measures? 2. Six months ahead on-site visit - concrete preparation - Government prepares input on technical compliance with R8 and effectiveness 3. One site visit – evaluators talk to NPOs and other stakeholders - NPO perception of risk? - Effectiveness of current measures? 4. Drafting evaluation report (MER)
Evaluation in Belgium in 2014 • Partial compliance with regard to R8 (technical compliance) – Belgium compliant last round • Short comings in awareness raising from government and NPO side. Lack of control and transparency of parts of the sector. • Moderate level of effectiveness. • Belgium will have to do so called progress-reports
Recommend
More recommend
