Journalists at most times people are rather callow. With little knowledge, principles and prejudices floating can be invoked to sacrifice anything to cause a sensation. This opportunity irresponsible appears more frequently in their treatment of offshore jurisdictions.
Offshore financial centers were once called taxhavens. The term has become synonymous havens tax evasion. These jurisdictions applied a reduced tax rate than many industrial countries whose governments have been injured by the loss of income and which journalists took pleasure in pointing fingers dirty in these jurisdictions:
give to Caesar what is due to Caesar became render to Caesar what is Caesar's particular wants to have.
Not so much the loss of revenue but the ability, and without too much thought, to point a finger at hypocrite jurisdictions, the certainty that the residents of these jurisdictions do not vote.
Journalists desperate to reveal and denounce are only too willing to look for another Watergate or Clinton under every stone. What better destination of small countries?
Their approach is predictable: Robert Maxwell was a crook, Robert Maxwell worked through companies abroad, and companies incorporated abroad exist only for illegal and fraudulent. If they can put into this equation contacts with Liechtenstein, the Channel Islands or the Cayman Islands, the sentence is complete. Refutations fall on deaf ears. The logic is that because Robert Maxwell encased in an offshore center all other depositors of such jurisdiction are criminally contaminated.
The fact that offshore centers are responsible for at least 30 percent of international investment legitimate in the world counts for nothing. The last ten years have seen a huge growth in the importance of skills offered by professionals in offshore centers. This was due to many influences.
First, the growth of wealth in new areas of the world, starting with the Middle East, requires expertise in investments, law, accounting and insurance, and other aspects of international investments that are lacking in their countries. Turning elsewhere for advice often meant going to the independent capacity and increasing offshore centers. Certainly love favorable tax regime in many of them was an attraction.
Investors were not immediately hampered by a high rate of taxation, nor were engaged for placing investments in a single country. The expertise that is now available in offshore centers more sophisticated is the same as that available in London, New York or anywhere else. Especially have the independence and flexibility to act freed from clawing political dogma and rigid alliances.
The independence of London as a financial center is decreasing. Under the heel of Brussels new investors from other parts of the world will look to consultants in offshore centers to place their investments. If reporters want to acknowledge it or not this is the position. As the center of global economic power shifts from Europe and North America for the Asia-Pacific press censorship may be regretted a day. The begging bowl held by the United Kingdom for the Japanese industry is likely to be repeated. The short-sighted and chauvinistic attitude of the press may then be deplored. Unfortunately, by that time the journalists and their political friends have made their fortunes and gone (probably an offshore center) leaving the population, whose morality was falsely tickled by their revelations wrong, the poorest.
Comment by George Bernard Shaw, that 'there is nothing more ridiculous than the British nation in a fit of political morality' is not without similar comparison in the financial field. Currently journalists have a wonderful vehicle to shock in money laundering. The money laundering words are easily remembered and quoted. Allegations of money laundering are easy to make. Moreover the allegations of money laundering are wonderful to do;
they may be challenged bankers, financiers and others whose professional confidentiality obligations are easily labeled as conspiracy and secrecy.
If these accusations are combined with an offshore becomes irresistible target journalistic like sex and the royal family. Now we are in dangerous territory. Popular reasoning will ensure that those who complain of any conviction for money laundering, no matter how foolish and irresponsible that the sentence may be, is therefore in favor of money laundering and all the criminal elements involved.
So let's clear that up. There's nothing worse than the drug business. This vile trade must be stamped at each stage, and that includes those who deliberately dealing and launder money dealers. But this does not pass all the responsibility for crime prevention and prosecution of criminals on banks and other financial intermediaries that criminals could use.
Money laundering is the last stage visible in drug trafficking before they lose their identity and disappear as identifiable profits of crime. This is the purpose of money laundering, but the concealment of income is not the only criminal element in the operation, but it is the only crime where one of the parties may be completely innocent. Most of the money that is recycled involves a part so innocent. More money is recycled in London than in any other country in the world. This applies not only to the money of the drug industry, but also from other criminal activities around the world, including the former communist bloc.
The campaign relating to money laundering can be easily directed against the banks and financial institutions which, by their nature, are static, international and identifiable and are the first to blame.
Other links shady and furniture in criminal activities can not be condemned with the same taste. This does not diminish the guilt of money laundering, but criticism of financial institutions in offshore centers should be allowed only if there is some real and substantial evidence of active participation. Allegations additional vacancies should not be tolerated to distract attention from where the rest of the criminal activities in the drug business are held.
The production and distribution of drugs should be greater crime. These are clear and both sides of this transaction are knowingly engaged in criminal activities. Since the profits of the drug business are generated in the United States, the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe, and, in the case of Amsterdam, sometimes openly and with the tacit approval of the law, politicians and journalists from these countries should have the sense to understand that. If you neglect lies in measures of drug trafficking ineffective. Of course denying the benefit of criminal proceeds is a valid deterrent. The governments of many countries of the world are fumbling regarding the best method to apply. Each country must adopt their own methods. But progress has been made, and it is now clear that in this aspect of international law no country exists in isolation. Each jurisdiction, and that includes offshore jurisdictions, willingly conform to international standards, but these standards are ineffective in many cases because of the difficulty of the problem. Islands are not islands, as far as international law is concerned. E 'therefore particularly stupid when another newspaper respected wise can understand both the principles and accept blatantly sensational interpretation of the laws of a country and an island of labels "a haven of Crook".
The Sunday Times in January fell into this trap. Encouraged by a minority political annoying, did much of his own interpretation of the part of the act Seychelles European Development. This law brings together for the investor biggest incentive program and approval. This applies to investors of at least $ 10 million. A clause in this law gives immunity from prosecution for all criminal proceedings except criminal proceedings against crimes of violence and drug trafficking in The Seychelles
The Sunday Times did a little 'better than what gives with scissors and paste this subsection a preamble different and make their own interpretation, while applying any of the principles of legal construction. The result was that the government of the Seychelles has been given the reputation of being able to provide immunity from prosecution in the world. This is madness journalism.
The law does not give the European Development complete immunity and total of all criminal proceedings. Even the most liberal interpretation of immunity is given only after careful consideration and approval by the government. And 'the Government of Seychelles that handle the law and have no intention to undermine the good reputation of the Seychelles.
They only allow incentives and Immunities of the law to be applied when an applicant has had space beneath their international standards. Secondly, it is clear that the courts are not competent Seychelles in relation to offenses that are committed outside Seychelles.
For any offshore jurisdiction to be able to guarantee immunity for global nothing is a surprise. Politicians and journalists usually ignore the independent sovereignty of offshore jurisdictions, but in this case have exaggerated the power of a country to dominate the criminal law of other countries. This immunity does not extend to all civil proceedings.
Apart from a strictly legal interpretation it must be remembered that the law should not be seen in isolation but must be taken in combination with other regulations in Seychelles which will include, in the very near future, anti-money laundering international standards.
There was some nonsense like that in other newspapers, and this has influenced some strange statements of Sovereign governments and international organizations that have jumped on the bandwagon to make journalistic reproaches Prim and reckless. The Sunday Times (after the unfair treatment of Seychelles) got egg on his face the following week, where, amidst all the usual talk about the last feudal outpost in the British Isles, the citizens of Sark were revealed by exploit single tax position of the island. "Islanders cashing Sark Lark Bonanza" said the headlines. The article appeared to be surprised that this jurisdiction primitive had heard of company formation. What the journalists had not heard was that the "Sark Lark" ended years ago. This particular bit 'tax planning gimmick depended definition of UK resident company from which they were exercised central management and control.
If the directors of a British company met in a rowboat off Sark then the company was not controlled in the United Kingdom and the tax consequences favorable result. The island is also useful for companies incorporated in Jersey but the change in the law Jersey rendered useless.
The newspaper also did not realize that Sark is an independent jurisdiction and simply insist on its independence is not an attribute of nationality unreasonable despite its affront to the chattering classes. Projects anti-money laundering continue. There seems to be no shortage of ofresolve implement the provisions against money laundering. Anti-money laundering are increasingly varied as the original measurements, based on "know your customer" proved to be ineffective. There is still, however, noprecise international anti-money laundering and money laundering specific regime available with which individual professionals and bankers are able to determine the legality of their lawyers clients.International deny criminals access What is increasing is the determination and the degree of cooperation between the countries. This is being enencouraged by a resolution of the Bar Association. This resolution, passed at the Paris meeting, in September last year, urging national governments to adopt the main recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force and invited members of the association to promote standards highprofessional which they will embody in a code conduct to guide lawyers worldwide. The intention is to deny access to criminal legal services that facilitate the laundering of proceeds of crime. The background paper presented to the members noted that lawyers have an increasingly important role in helping to discourage the subversion of the profession, by criminal elements. The IBA say that money launderers have developed more sophisticated techniques lawyers may inadvertently be involved and must be sufficiently aware of contributing to the identification, arrest and detention of persons responsible, as well beingable and prepared to help the seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds ofcrime.
Despite support the establishment of an international criminal court, that the International Law Commission has suggested should hire as having international jurisdiction in serious crimes of drug trafficking, the IBA to recognize that, because of the enormity of the threat that continues and other associations Bar will have to undertake more specific in the future.
Brazil's efforts as mentioned above each country has adopted its measures to outsmart the money launderers. Individual countries find the concept of money laundering difficult to deal with. Brazil, for example, is currently considering proposals based on principles already adopted in other countries, but is finding that it is not simply a matter of adopting legislation off the shelf.
The introduction of the law effective anti-money laundering in this country has a long way to go. The Minister of Justice is concerned that it should not create a law more severe than those of other countries. Nothing should impede the flow of capital is not criminal. Although the proposals makemoney laundering from illegal sources criminals in Brazil will have no beneficial effect in more and will not affect the recycling of money outside of the country. According to the Treasury Department, offlinds money laundering from Brazil exceeded $ 20 billion in the last four years. Brazil has discovered that it is not simply a matter of passing a law to make money laundering illeal, but there are many other situations that require attention illicit side. For example, the Brazilian government has recently launched investigations of Brazilian banks that have misusedthe rights to have accounts abroad and are trying to cooperate with Caribbean countries to further investigation. It 'also co-operates with the US authorities in reviewing its controls on Sovereign accounts.
In addition, a technical team was sent by the Brazilian Central Bank in the Cayman Islands and there is the possibility to extend the investigation to the Bahamas. The Central Bank is responsible for crimes connected with the funds to be held by Brazilians in the Caymans. Brokers shall keep many of the accounts:
The identity of the principal is hidden. They are also being investigated illegal uses of non-resident bank accounts in Brazil. According to the Brazilian finance minister, Pedro Malan, dollars are illegally sent from Brazil from these accounts, but the economy still requires this type of account to enable people and businesses outside of Brazil to move funds in institutions Brazilian financing.
This is the purpose for which they were created non-resident accounts. Non-resident accounts are never less than the principal means by which Crooks illegal export dollars from Brazil to the United States. Many of these dollars find their way to Brazil as part of American investments in the country. The Treasury Department estimates that over the past five years at least $ 100 billion of illegal money has found its way to the United States in Latin America. These funds were obtained from drug trafficking, the sale of gold on the black market and other illegal activities. The transmission of dollars within Brazil is less regulated international transmission:
Banking secrecy and financial control insufficient hinder investigation.
Brazil recognizes that has to deal with criminalize money laundering and more to come excessive bank secrecy, in order to be able to provide an audit trail of illegal dollars. Also recognizes that must find the right balance in its constitutional, legal and cultural.