2011年-IMF国际货币组织全球_Guernsey_Report_on_Observance_of_Standards_and_Codes_22页_565kb

Guernsey: Report on Observance of Standards and Codes—FATF AML/CFT Recommendations Summary

Core Content

This report evaluates the compliance of Guernsey with the FATF 40 Recommendations for Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and 9 Special Recommendations on Combating the Financing of Terrorism (CFT). It was prepared by the IMF Legal Department and approved by Sean Hagan on December 22, 2010. The assessment is based on the 2004 FATF methodology and highlights both strengths and areas for improvement in Guernsey's AML/CFT framework.

Main Findings

• Legal Framework: Guernsey has a comprehensive AML/CFT legal framework that aligns with international standards. Money laundering and terrorism financing are criminalized fully, and the legal system allows for asset freezing and confiscation.
• Implementation Gaps: While the legal provisions are sound, implementation remains a concern. Few prosecutions or convictions for money laundering or terrorism financing have occurred, raising questions about the effective application of these laws.
• Freezing Mechanisms: The legal framework for freezing funds under UNSCRs 1267 and 1373 is largely sufficient, but there is a need for clearer provisions regarding the non-notification of designated persons.
• Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU): The FIS (Financial Intelligence Service) serves as the FIU for Guernsey and is active in international information sharing. It performs a pre-investigative and intermediary role, with a high dissemination rate of STRs (Suspicious Transaction Reports). However, its capacity to investigate and prosecute money laundering as a stand-alone offense is limited.
• Cross-Border Cooperation: Guernsey has effective mechanisms for domestic AML/CFT coordination and a robust legal framework for mutual legal assistance (MLA) and extradition. The FIS and police have a constructive approach to cross-border cooperation and share information with overseas agencies.

Key Recommendations

Legal Systems and Institutional Measures

• CDD and Recordkeeping: The legal framework for customer due diligence (CDD) and recordkeeping is in line with international standards. However, there is a need to enhance the effectiveness of these measures, particularly in identifying high-risk customers and ensuring accurate beneficial ownership information.
• Confiscation and Freezing: The legal provisions for confiscation and freezing of criminal assets are comprehensive. Continued use of these mechanisms is recommended to secure proceeds of crime.
• Financial Secrecy: No legal impediments prevent the implementation of FATF recommendations. However, there is a need for greater emphasis on transparency and the enforcement of confidentiality rules.

Preventive Measures – Financial Institutions

• CDD and Due Diligence: Financial institutions are required to conduct CDD and enhanced due diligence for high-risk customers, including PEPs. The current system is adequate but needs further strengthening.
• Audit Function: There is no requirement for financial institutions to maintain an independent and adequately resourced audit function. This is a key area for improvement.
• Penalties: The discretionary financial penalties available to the GFSC are considered insufficient and not proportionate to violations. The penalty limit of £200,000 is too low.
• Training and Compliance: Financial institutions should enhance training for employees, particularly in the eCasino sector, and ensure that all internal procedures are robust and tested.

Preventive Measures – Designated Non-Financial Businesses and Professions (DNFBPs)

• CDD and Risk Management: DNFBPs, including lawyers, accountants, estate agents, and eCasinos, have CDD requirements in place. However, some shortcomings exist, particularly in the eCasino sector.
• Online Verification and Non-Face-to-Face Transactions: Online verification methods used by eCasinos are not reliable enough. Additional measures are needed to mitigate the risks of non-face-to-face transactions.
• Exemptions and Guidance: Some exemptions, such as those for accountants and directors of companies, are not in line with international standards. Guidance from the GFSC on risk jurisdictions is contradictory and needs clarification.
• Supervision and Sanctions: The GFSC and AGCC have adequate powers to supervise DNFBPs, but more resources are needed for the TCSP sector. Sanctions for non-compliance are not effective enough.

Legal Persons and Non-Profit Organizations (NPOs)

• Company Transparency: Guernsey has measures to ensure transparency of legal persons, including the requirement for registered agents and licensed TCSPs. However, the registration regime for NPOs is not comprehensive and does not apply to all charitable organizations.
• Beneficial Ownership Information: While beneficial ownership information is generally available for companies and LLPs, it is not publicly accessible for NPOs. This poses a risk for transparency and accountability.
• Sanctions for Non-Compliance: Sanctions for non-compliance with registration requirements are not effective or dissuasive.

National and International Cooperation

• Policy Coordination: Guernsey has an active policy coordination committee that facilitates cooperation among domestic AML/CFT stakeholders.
• MLA and Extradition: The legal framework for mutual legal assistance and extradition is sound, and the majority of requests are processed constructively and timely. However, the extradition process is still managed by UK authorities.
• Cross-Border Cooperation: The FIS and police engage in significant cross-border information sharing, which is essential for combating ML and TF. The system should continue to enhance its investigative capabilities.

Summary Table of Observance and Key Recommendations

Conclusion

Guernsey has a strong legal and institutional foundation for AML/CFT compliance. However, the effectiveness of implementation, particularly in the areas of enforcement, transparency, and cross-border cooperation, remains a challenge. Strengthening the legal framework, enhancing supervision, and improving penalties and training are essential to further solidify its AML/CFT regime.