Monday’s Cabinet meeting, chaired by King Abdullah, Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, resulted in approval for measures to address issues concerning money laundering and terrorism funding as well as housing.
The King briefed the session, held at Al-Yamama Palace in the capital, on the most significant communications of the past week, including the visits to the Kingdom of the President of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the President of Sudan, Omar Hassan Al-Bashir.
King Abdullah also briefed the Cabinet on communications he received from the President of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh, and his reception of Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmed Dawoud Awghlou and the Second Vice President of Afghanistan, Abdul Karim Khalili.
Minister of Culture and Information Abdul Aziz Khoja released a statement to the Saudi Press Agency (SPA) saying that the meeting looked at reports on developments in the Arab and Islamic world as well as wider international affairs and discussed the Kingdom’s economy following the recent announcement of the national budget.
Cabinet approval was given to authorize Prince Naif, Second Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Interior, to sign with foreign authorities a memorandum of understanding on collaboration in investigation into money laundering and the financing of terrorism.
Measures were also approved following a study on providing land grants to Saudi nationals to facilitate the acquisition of homes. The measures included joining the Ministry of Municipal and Rural Affairs program to the Iskan housing program to guarantee citizens housing, the provision of land to the Housing Commission to build homes for nationals in conformity with regulations and government-planned zones, provide all services stipulated for by the budget, and help beneficiaries of housing projects integrate with the rest of society by ensuring that projects are evenly distributed across cities. Cabinet approval was further given for the proposed Board of Directors at the Balad Al-Ameen Construction Development Company for the period of three years and its members from government, private and other sectors.
Similar approval was given for the restructuring of the Board of Directors of the Jeddah Development and Construction Company.
Source: The Saudi Gazette
Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Palestine. Show all posts
on Monday, May 28, 2012
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has signed an anti-money laundering decree that could make it harder for Hamas to obtain funds and is also meant to reassure foreign banks that they can do business with their Palestinian counterparts, officials said Saturday.
Hamas officials acknowledged that the new regulations could hamper its cash flow. "This law may have some effect on the movement, but eventually it won't succeed in fulfilling its goal of drying up the financial sources of the Hamas movement," said a spokesman, Sami Abu Zuhri.
No bank will deal directly with Hamas. However, Palestinian officials from Abbas' Fatah movement have alleged that Hamas has made deals with moneychangers and merchants to receive funds from Iran, Arab countries and Islamic charities abroad. Cash is also believed to be smuggled through tunnels into Gaza.
Abbas signed the decree Friday, and it was published in the Palestinian media on Saturday.
Under the new regulations, violators face three to 15 years in prisons and fines of up to 600,000 shekels ($125,000).
Jihad Alwazir, the deputy governor of the Palestine Monetary Fund, said the regulations were put together with the help of the International Monetary Fund and were in line with international standards.
"The prosecutors now have more means at their disposal," Alwazir said of the new regulations. The Palestine Monetary Fund serves as the Palestinians' central bank.
Alwazir said the new rules should reassure foreign banks that they can do business with their Palestinian counterparts without running afoul of U.S. and Israeli counter-terrorism regulations.
Two Israeli banks, Bank Hapoalim and Israel Discount Bank, announced several weeks ago that they were severing their ties with Gaza's banks. The Israeli banks are wary of inadvertently funneling money to Hamas.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/27/africa/ME-GEN-Palestinians-Money-Laundering.php
Hamas officials acknowledged that the new regulations could hamper its cash flow. "This law may have some effect on the movement, but eventually it won't succeed in fulfilling its goal of drying up the financial sources of the Hamas movement," said a spokesman, Sami Abu Zuhri.
No bank will deal directly with Hamas. However, Palestinian officials from Abbas' Fatah movement have alleged that Hamas has made deals with moneychangers and merchants to receive funds from Iran, Arab countries and Islamic charities abroad. Cash is also believed to be smuggled through tunnels into Gaza.
Abbas signed the decree Friday, and it was published in the Palestinian media on Saturday.
Under the new regulations, violators face three to 15 years in prisons and fines of up to 600,000 shekels ($125,000).
Jihad Alwazir, the deputy governor of the Palestine Monetary Fund, said the regulations were put together with the help of the International Monetary Fund and were in line with international standards.
"The prosecutors now have more means at their disposal," Alwazir said of the new regulations. The Palestine Monetary Fund serves as the Palestinians' central bank.
Alwazir said the new rules should reassure foreign banks that they can do business with their Palestinian counterparts without running afoul of U.S. and Israeli counter-terrorism regulations.
Two Israeli banks, Bank Hapoalim and Israel Discount Bank, announced several weeks ago that they were severing their ties with Gaza's banks. The Israeli banks are wary of inadvertently funneling money to Hamas.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/27/africa/ME-GEN-Palestinians-Money-Laundering.php
on Friday, May 25, 2012
By Carrie Johnson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 25, 2008; Page A06
A federal jury in Dallas convicted five men with ties to a prominent Muslim charity of scores of criminal charges yesterday, handing the U.S. government a significant victory in its largest terrorism financing trial.
The verdicts against former leaders of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, once ranked as the country's largest Muslim charitable organization, came only hours after a federal appeals court panel in New York upheld criminal convictions of three men accused of helping plot deadly bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
Together, the developments strengthened the Justice Department's power to choke the sources of funding that help fuel terrorist schemes -- and to use warrantless electronic surveillance to monitor the activities of U.S. citizens suspected of engaging in international conspiracies.
Yet the victories in cases first filed as long as a decade ago underscore the lengthy path through the criminal justice system, which has afforded the government a mixed record in terrorism prosecutions.
Dennis M. Lormel, a former chief of the FBI's terrorist financing operation section, said the guilty verdicts on the 108 charges in the Holy Land trial amounted to a "validation" of the government's approach and encouraged his former colleagues to aggressively pursue similar investigations.
But Lormel said the most critical, practical development may have come in December 2001, when authorities raided the charity's headquarters in Richardson, Tex., and seized its assets.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, law enforcement officials accused Holy Land of funneling more than $12 million to the militant Palestinian group Hamas. The original case against Holy Land and its leaders included more than 100 unindicted co-conspirators, a status that several charities challenged as overreaching by the government.
"For many years, the Holy Land Foundation used the guise of charity to raise and funnel millions of dollars to the infrastructure of the Hamas terror organization," said J. Patrick Rowan, assistant attorney general for national security. "This prosecution demonstrates our resolve to ensure that humanitarian relief efforts are not used as a mechanism to disguise and enable support for terrorist groups."
In the course of the trial, defense attorneys argued that prosecutors had wrongfully targeted philanthropically minded people who wanted to support schools and hospitals in Palestinian territories devastated by conflict with Israel. They drew in part on arguments by civil liberties advocates, who maintain that prosecutors sometimes exploit laws designed to crack down on material support to terrorists to criminalize activities protected by the First Amendment.
The Holy Land verdicts come a year after the first case dissolved in a mistrial. The government's record in prosecutions involving the material support of terrorist networks has been checkered, as questions have arisen about the proper use of informants and whether authorities arrested suspects without enough evidence.
This time around, after enduring months of second-guessing after the Holy Land mistrial, government lawyers pared their evidence and limited the number of witnesses they presented to the jury, which deliberated for eight days.
Earlier yesterday, the convictions of three men with ties to al-Qaeda were upheld in New York. They were convicted for their roles in the 1998 bombings of embassy buildings in Kenya and Tanzania. The plots killed 224 people, including a dozen Americans, and injured thousands.
The panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, led by Judge José A. Cabranes, unanimously rejected defense claims of insufficient evidence and violations of the Classified Information Procedures Act. Cabranes was joined by Judges Jon O. Newman and Wilfred Feinberg.
The defendants, Mohammed Saddiq Odeh, Mohamed Rashed Daoud al-Owhali and Wadih el-Hage, are serving lengthy prison sentences in a supermax prison facility in Colorado. They were convicted in 2001.
Attorneys for Hage, who had been a close associate of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, asserted that government investigators improperly collected evidence through wiretaps of his land-based and cellular phones from August 1996 to August 1997. They also argued that federal agents did not secure appropriate warrants to search his apartment in Nairobi. Because Hage is a naturalized U.S. citizen, the defense said, the government should have sought court permission before taking such intrusive steps.
The appeals court panel disagreed, ruling that "we see no merit in this challenge" and finding that the search was "reasonable under the circumstances presented here."
In a conclusion that legal experts say could have implications for other challenges to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the panel ruled that U.S. courts could admit evidence obtained through warrantless overseas searches of American citizens, but that the searches must be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
"The decision of the Court of Appeals . . . is one further measure of justice for the victims of those attacks," U.S. Attorney Michael J. Garcia said.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Source: Washington Post
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, November 25, 2008; Page A06
A federal jury in Dallas convicted five men with ties to a prominent Muslim charity of scores of criminal charges yesterday, handing the U.S. government a significant victory in its largest terrorism financing trial.
The verdicts against former leaders of the Texas-based Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, once ranked as the country's largest Muslim charitable organization, came only hours after a federal appeals court panel in New York upheld criminal convictions of three men accused of helping plot deadly bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa.
Together, the developments strengthened the Justice Department's power to choke the sources of funding that help fuel terrorist schemes -- and to use warrantless electronic surveillance to monitor the activities of U.S. citizens suspected of engaging in international conspiracies.
Yet the victories in cases first filed as long as a decade ago underscore the lengthy path through the criminal justice system, which has afforded the government a mixed record in terrorism prosecutions.
Dennis M. Lormel, a former chief of the FBI's terrorist financing operation section, said the guilty verdicts on the 108 charges in the Holy Land trial amounted to a "validation" of the government's approach and encouraged his former colleagues to aggressively pursue similar investigations.
But Lormel said the most critical, practical development may have come in December 2001, when authorities raided the charity's headquarters in Richardson, Tex., and seized its assets.
After the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, law enforcement officials accused Holy Land of funneling more than $12 million to the militant Palestinian group Hamas. The original case against Holy Land and its leaders included more than 100 unindicted co-conspirators, a status that several charities challenged as overreaching by the government.
"For many years, the Holy Land Foundation used the guise of charity to raise and funnel millions of dollars to the infrastructure of the Hamas terror organization," said J. Patrick Rowan, assistant attorney general for national security. "This prosecution demonstrates our resolve to ensure that humanitarian relief efforts are not used as a mechanism to disguise and enable support for terrorist groups."
In the course of the trial, defense attorneys argued that prosecutors had wrongfully targeted philanthropically minded people who wanted to support schools and hospitals in Palestinian territories devastated by conflict with Israel. They drew in part on arguments by civil liberties advocates, who maintain that prosecutors sometimes exploit laws designed to crack down on material support to terrorists to criminalize activities protected by the First Amendment.
The Holy Land verdicts come a year after the first case dissolved in a mistrial. The government's record in prosecutions involving the material support of terrorist networks has been checkered, as questions have arisen about the proper use of informants and whether authorities arrested suspects without enough evidence.
This time around, after enduring months of second-guessing after the Holy Land mistrial, government lawyers pared their evidence and limited the number of witnesses they presented to the jury, which deliberated for eight days.
Earlier yesterday, the convictions of three men with ties to al-Qaeda were upheld in New York. They were convicted for their roles in the 1998 bombings of embassy buildings in Kenya and Tanzania. The plots killed 224 people, including a dozen Americans, and injured thousands.
The panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit, led by Judge José A. Cabranes, unanimously rejected defense claims of insufficient evidence and violations of the Classified Information Procedures Act. Cabranes was joined by Judges Jon O. Newman and Wilfred Feinberg.
The defendants, Mohammed Saddiq Odeh, Mohamed Rashed Daoud al-Owhali and Wadih el-Hage, are serving lengthy prison sentences in a supermax prison facility in Colorado. They were convicted in 2001.
Attorneys for Hage, who had been a close associate of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, asserted that government investigators improperly collected evidence through wiretaps of his land-based and cellular phones from August 1996 to August 1997. They also argued that federal agents did not secure appropriate warrants to search his apartment in Nairobi. Because Hage is a naturalized U.S. citizen, the defense said, the government should have sought court permission before taking such intrusive steps.
The appeals court panel disagreed, ruling that "we see no merit in this challenge" and finding that the search was "reasonable under the circumstances presented here."
In a conclusion that legal experts say could have implications for other challenges to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the panel ruled that U.S. courts could admit evidence obtained through warrantless overseas searches of American citizens, but that the searches must be reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
"The decision of the Court of Appeals . . . is one further measure of justice for the victims of those attacks," U.S. Attorney Michael J. Garcia said.
Staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Source: Washington Post
on Thursday, May 17, 2012
By Avi Issacharoff
Hamas has dramatically reduced its money transfers to various charitable organizations in the West Bank formerly linked to the group, as the Palestinian Authority continues to assert its control over those organizations.
Hamas had used the charities to transfer money to its operatives in the West Bank and to strengthen its standing among the Palestinian public. Since the beginning of this year, the PA has systematically installed new managements at the charities, which then transferred the organizations' assets to the PA itself.
In addition, the PA has appointed religious leaders affiliated with the Ramallah government to the Waqf Islamic religious trust, which was previously run by clerics identified with the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas' parent movement. This leadership change has forced Hamas to stem the flow of money to the charities it once funded.
The global economic downturn has also slowed the money flow, as major donors in the Persian Gulf have transferred smaller amounts into Hamas' coffers. Tighter Israeli supervision of the charities and more familiarity with Hamas' money-laundering techniques also played a role in the reduction.
In addition, Palestinian security services recently seized several million shekels destined for Hamas-affiliated social services organizations.
Source: Haaretz
Hamas has dramatically reduced its money transfers to various charitable organizations in the West Bank formerly linked to the group, as the Palestinian Authority continues to assert its control over those organizations.
Hamas had used the charities to transfer money to its operatives in the West Bank and to strengthen its standing among the Palestinian public. Since the beginning of this year, the PA has systematically installed new managements at the charities, which then transferred the organizations' assets to the PA itself.
In addition, the PA has appointed religious leaders affiliated with the Ramallah government to the Waqf Islamic religious trust, which was previously run by clerics identified with the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas' parent movement. This leadership change has forced Hamas to stem the flow of money to the charities it once funded.
The global economic downturn has also slowed the money flow, as major donors in the Persian Gulf have transferred smaller amounts into Hamas' coffers. Tighter Israeli supervision of the charities and more familiarity with Hamas' money-laundering techniques also played a role in the reduction.
In addition, Palestinian security services recently seized several million shekels destined for Hamas-affiliated social services organizations.
Source: Haaretz
on Tuesday, May 15, 2012
The U.S. government organized a workshop in Jordan to teach officials from the Arab countries how to detect and investigate the smuggling of money.
The U.S. has been working with Jordan and other Arab countries to ensure that banking institutions are subject to appropriate oversight and that they have effective programs in place to prevent money-laundering and terrorist financing.
Participants, including representatives from Jordan, Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, the Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Tunisia and Yemen, examined anti-money laundering standards used by the Financial Action Task Force, a Paris-based inter-government body set up in 1989 by the Group of Eight industrialized nations.
This week, U.S. federal prosecutors said two NY residents were indicted on charges of trying to smuggle $500,000 (euro323,000) from the U.S. to Jordan.
Authorities said a grand jury in Hartford, Connecticut returned an indictment charging 35-year-old Hassan Abuzaitoun and 33-year-old Mohammad Alazzam with conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to smuggle bulk cash from the United States. Both are naturalized U.S. citizens from Jordan residing in Yonkers, New York.
Jordanian authorities have often asserted that Jordan was free of money laundering because of its strict monetary regulations and practices.
In 2004, three different groups of families of suicide bombing victims in Israel filed suits in a Brooklyn, N.Y. federal court against Jordan's largest financial institution _ Arab Bank _ alleging that it moved donations from Saudi Arabia to militant Palestinian groups, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
The bank denied the allegation. It later decided to close down its New York branch saying it was pursuing its strategy to focus on operations in the Arab world and Europe.
http://www.amlosphere.com/america/legislation/us-workshop-in-jordan-builds-support-to-battle-money-laundering.html
The U.S. has been working with Jordan and other Arab countries to ensure that banking institutions are subject to appropriate oversight and that they have effective programs in place to prevent money-laundering and terrorist financing.
Participants, including representatives from Jordan, Algeria, Egypt, Kuwait, Lebanon, Mauritania, Morocco, Oman, the Palestinian Authority, Qatar, Tunisia and Yemen, examined anti-money laundering standards used by the Financial Action Task Force, a Paris-based inter-government body set up in 1989 by the Group of Eight industrialized nations.
This week, U.S. federal prosecutors said two NY residents were indicted on charges of trying to smuggle $500,000 (euro323,000) from the U.S. to Jordan.
Authorities said a grand jury in Hartford, Connecticut returned an indictment charging 35-year-old Hassan Abuzaitoun and 33-year-old Mohammad Alazzam with conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to smuggle bulk cash from the United States. Both are naturalized U.S. citizens from Jordan residing in Yonkers, New York.
Jordanian authorities have often asserted that Jordan was free of money laundering because of its strict monetary regulations and practices.
In 2004, three different groups of families of suicide bombing victims in Israel filed suits in a Brooklyn, N.Y. federal court against Jordan's largest financial institution _ Arab Bank _ alleging that it moved donations from Saudi Arabia to militant Palestinian groups, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
The bank denied the allegation. It later decided to close down its New York branch saying it was pursuing its strategy to focus on operations in the Arab world and Europe.
http://www.amlosphere.com/america/legislation/us-workshop-in-jordan-builds-support-to-battle-money-laundering.html
Labels:
Algeria,
Egypt,
Jordan,
Kuwait,
Laundering,
Lebanon,
Morocco,
Oman,
Palestine,
Qatar,
Saudi Arabia,
Tunisia,
US,
Yemen
0
comments
on Sunday, May 13, 2012
U.S. Department of Justice
**Verbatim
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, June 13, 2008
WWW.USDOJ.GOV
NEW YORK- Michael J. Garcia, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and Michele M. Leonhart, the Acting Administrator of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), announced that international arms dealer Monzer Al Kassar, a/k/a Abu Munawar, a/k/a El Taous, arrived in New York today after being extradited from Spain on federal terrorism charges. Al Kassar was extradited to New York for his participation in a conspiracy to sell millions of dollars worth of weapons to the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (the FARC) -- a designated foreign terrorist organization -- to be used to kill Americans in Colombia. Al Kassar’s co-defendants, Tareq Mousa Al Ghazi and Luis Felipe Moreno Godoy, were both previously extradited to New York from Romania to face the same terrorism charges. According to the superseding Indictment filed in Manhattan federal court:
Since the early 1970s, Al Kassar has been a source of weapons and military equipment for armed factions engaged in violent conflicts around the world. Some of these factions have included known terrorist organizations, such as the Palestinian Liberation Front (PLF), the goals of which included attacking United States interests and United States nationals.
To carry out his weapons-trafficking business, Al Kassar developed an international network of criminal associates, including co-defendants Al Ghazi and Moreno Godoy, as well as front companies and bank accounts in various countries, including the United Kingdom, Spain, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Poland, Bulgaria, and Romania. Additionally, Al Kassar has engaged in money-laundering transactions in bank accounts throughout the world to disguise the illicit nature of his criminal proceeds.
Between February 2006 and May 2007, Al Kassar agreed to sell to the FARC millions of dollars worth of weapons, including thousands of machine guns, millions of rounds of ammunition, rocket-propelled grenade launchers (RPGs), and surface-to-air missile systems (SAMs). During a series of recorded telephone calls, e-mails, and in-person meetings, Al Kassar agreed to sell the weapons to two confidential sources working with the DEA (the CSs), who represented that they were acquiring these weapons for the FARC, with the specific understanding that the weapons were to be used to attack United States helicopters in Colombia.
During their consensually-recorded meetings, Al Kassar provided the CSs with, among other things: (1) a schematic of the vessel to be used to transport the weapons; (2) specifications for the SAMs he agreed to sell to the FARC; and (3) bank accounts in Spain and Lebanon that were ultimately used to receive and conceal more than $400,000 sent from DEA undercover accounts that the CSs represented were FARC drug proceeds for the weapons deal. During his meetings with the CSs, Al Kassar reviewed Nicaraguan end-user certificates that he accepted despite knowing that the arms were destined for the FARC in Colombia. Al Kassar also promised to provide the FARC with ton-quantities of C-4 explosives, as well as expert trainers from Lebanon to teach the FARC how to effectively use C-4 and improvised explosive devices (commonly referred to as IEDs). In addition, Al Kassar offered to send a thousand men to fight with the FARC against United States military officers in Colombia.
The Indictment charges Al Kassar with four separate terrorism offenses:
Count One: Conspiracy to kill United States nationals, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2332(b);
Count Two: Conspiracy to kill United States officers or employees, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1114 and 1117;
Count Three: Conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2332g; and
Count Four: Conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 2339B.
In addition, Al Kassar is charged in Count Five with money laundering, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956.
The superseding Indictment seeks the forfeiture of an estate located in Marbella, Spain, and all funds contained in three separate bank accounts. The forfeitures represent the alleged proceeds obtained from the charged offenses.
Al Kassar is expected to appear later this afternoon in Magistrate court in Manhattan federal court.
If convicted of Counts One through Three, Al Kassar faces a maximum sentence of any term of years or life imprisonment, as well as a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years’ imprisonment on Count Three. As part of the extradition process, however, the United States has provided assurances to the government of Spain that it will not seek a life sentence for Al Kassar, but instead will ask for a prison term of years. If convicted of Count Four, Al Kassar faces a maximum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment. Finally, if convicted of Count Five, Al Kassar faces a maximum sentence of 20 years' imprisonment.
The international law enforcement operation that culminated with today’s extradition was the result of cooperation between the DEA, the Spanish National Police, and the Romanian Border Police.
Mr. Garcia praised the investigative efforts of the DEA, the Spanish National Police, and the Romanian Border Police. Mr. Garcia also thanked the United States Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs and the U.S. State Department.
"Monzer Al Kassar intended to provide millions of dollars worth of lethal weapons to a foreign terrorist organization to be used to kill Americans," said U.S. Attorney Michael J. Garcia. "As a result of extraordinary cooperation with our international law enforcement partners, Al Kassar will now face justice for his crimes in a United States courtroom."
"The arrest, extradition and pending criminal prosecution of Monzer Al Kassar before a U.S. Court of justice are a testament to DEA's global alliances and unique investigative skills," said DEA Acting Administrator Michele M. Leonhart. "Al Kassar's days of arming and funding global terrorists are over. Spanish authorities are to be commended for their diligence and perseverance to ensure Al Kassar's extradition to the United States."
Assistant United States Attorneys Boyd M. Johnson III, Leslie C. Brown, and Brendan R. McGuire are in charge of the prosecutions.
The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
**Verbatim
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, June 13, 2008
WWW.USDOJ.GOV
NEW YORK- Michael J. Garcia, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and Michele M. Leonhart, the Acting Administrator of the United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), announced that international arms dealer Monzer Al Kassar, a/k/a Abu Munawar, a/k/a El Taous, arrived in New York today after being extradited from Spain on federal terrorism charges. Al Kassar was extradited to New York for his participation in a conspiracy to sell millions of dollars worth of weapons to the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (the FARC) -- a designated foreign terrorist organization -- to be used to kill Americans in Colombia. Al Kassar’s co-defendants, Tareq Mousa Al Ghazi and Luis Felipe Moreno Godoy, were both previously extradited to New York from Romania to face the same terrorism charges. According to the superseding Indictment filed in Manhattan federal court:
Since the early 1970s, Al Kassar has been a source of weapons and military equipment for armed factions engaged in violent conflicts around the world. Some of these factions have included known terrorist organizations, such as the Palestinian Liberation Front (PLF), the goals of which included attacking United States interests and United States nationals.
To carry out his weapons-trafficking business, Al Kassar developed an international network of criminal associates, including co-defendants Al Ghazi and Moreno Godoy, as well as front companies and bank accounts in various countries, including the United Kingdom, Spain, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Poland, Bulgaria, and Romania. Additionally, Al Kassar has engaged in money-laundering transactions in bank accounts throughout the world to disguise the illicit nature of his criminal proceeds.
Between February 2006 and May 2007, Al Kassar agreed to sell to the FARC millions of dollars worth of weapons, including thousands of machine guns, millions of rounds of ammunition, rocket-propelled grenade launchers (RPGs), and surface-to-air missile systems (SAMs). During a series of recorded telephone calls, e-mails, and in-person meetings, Al Kassar agreed to sell the weapons to two confidential sources working with the DEA (the CSs), who represented that they were acquiring these weapons for the FARC, with the specific understanding that the weapons were to be used to attack United States helicopters in Colombia.
During their consensually-recorded meetings, Al Kassar provided the CSs with, among other things: (1) a schematic of the vessel to be used to transport the weapons; (2) specifications for the SAMs he agreed to sell to the FARC; and (3) bank accounts in Spain and Lebanon that were ultimately used to receive and conceal more than $400,000 sent from DEA undercover accounts that the CSs represented were FARC drug proceeds for the weapons deal. During his meetings with the CSs, Al Kassar reviewed Nicaraguan end-user certificates that he accepted despite knowing that the arms were destined for the FARC in Colombia. Al Kassar also promised to provide the FARC with ton-quantities of C-4 explosives, as well as expert trainers from Lebanon to teach the FARC how to effectively use C-4 and improvised explosive devices (commonly referred to as IEDs). In addition, Al Kassar offered to send a thousand men to fight with the FARC against United States military officers in Colombia.
The Indictment charges Al Kassar with four separate terrorism offenses:
Count One: Conspiracy to kill United States nationals, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2332(b);
Count Two: Conspiracy to kill United States officers or employees, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1114 and 1117;
Count Three: Conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 2332g; and
Count Four: Conspiracy to provide material support or resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization, in violation of Title 18,
United States Code, Section 2339B.
In addition, Al Kassar is charged in Count Five with money laundering, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 1956.
The superseding Indictment seeks the forfeiture of an estate located in Marbella, Spain, and all funds contained in three separate bank accounts. The forfeitures represent the alleged proceeds obtained from the charged offenses.
Al Kassar is expected to appear later this afternoon in Magistrate court in Manhattan federal court.
If convicted of Counts One through Three, Al Kassar faces a maximum sentence of any term of years or life imprisonment, as well as a mandatory minimum sentence of 25 years’ imprisonment on Count Three. As part of the extradition process, however, the United States has provided assurances to the government of Spain that it will not seek a life sentence for Al Kassar, but instead will ask for a prison term of years. If convicted of Count Four, Al Kassar faces a maximum sentence of 15 years' imprisonment. Finally, if convicted of Count Five, Al Kassar faces a maximum sentence of 20 years' imprisonment.
The international law enforcement operation that culminated with today’s extradition was the result of cooperation between the DEA, the Spanish National Police, and the Romanian Border Police.
Mr. Garcia praised the investigative efforts of the DEA, the Spanish National Police, and the Romanian Border Police. Mr. Garcia also thanked the United States Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs and the U.S. State Department.
"Monzer Al Kassar intended to provide millions of dollars worth of lethal weapons to a foreign terrorist organization to be used to kill Americans," said U.S. Attorney Michael J. Garcia. "As a result of extraordinary cooperation with our international law enforcement partners, Al Kassar will now face justice for his crimes in a United States courtroom."
"The arrest, extradition and pending criminal prosecution of Monzer Al Kassar before a U.S. Court of justice are a testament to DEA's global alliances and unique investigative skills," said DEA Acting Administrator Michele M. Leonhart. "Al Kassar's days of arming and funding global terrorists are over. Spanish authorities are to be commended for their diligence and perseverance to ensure Al Kassar's extradition to the United States."
Assistant United States Attorneys Boyd M. Johnson III, Leslie C. Brown, and Brendan R. McGuire are in charge of the prosecutions.
The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations and the defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
on Monday, May 7, 2012
Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey announced Thursday that the Treasury Department has revoked Iran's U-turn license, further restricting Iran's access to the U.S. financial system. Prior to this action, U.S. financial institutions were authorized to process certain funds transfers for the direct or indirect benefit of Iran, provided such payments were initiated offshore by a non-Iranian financial institution and only passed through the U.S. financial system en route to another non-Iranian financial institution. Treasury's move follows a series of U.S. government actions to expose Iranian banks' involvement in the Iranian regime's support to terrorist groups and nuclear and missile proliferation.
November 6, 2008
HP-1258
Fact Sheet: Treasury Strengthens Preventive Measures Against Iran
On October 16, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), which has members representing 32 jurisdictions and is the world's premier standard-setting body for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT), warned for the fourth time about the risks posed to the international financial system by continuing deficiencies in Iran's AML/CFT regime. The FATF called for all countries to strengthen preventive measures to protect their financial systems from this risk. Additionally, the UN Security Council called upon all states in March 2008 to exercise vigilance over the activities of financial institutions in their territories with all Iranian banks.
Consistent with these multilateral calls for action, the Treasury Department is revoking the "U-turn" general license today to protect
The Treasury Department is taking a range of measures, including today's action, to counter these deceptive activities. The Treasury Department encourages all jurisdictions to adopt robust preventive measures consistent with the FATF warnings and relevant UN Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs).
➢ Bank Sepah.
➢ Bank Melli.
➢ Bank Mellat.
➢ Export Development Bank of
International Focus on Proliferation Risks Associated with Iranian Financial Institutions. The role that Iranian financial institutions play in Iranian proliferation activities is underscored by UNSCR 1803, which was adopted in March 2008 and calls upon states to exercise vigilance over the activities of their financial institutions with all Iranian banks. The FATF issued guidance in October 2008 to assist countries in implementing this provision. That guidance recommends that jurisdictions encourage their financial institutions to take strong preventive measures for the mitigation of risks posed by Iranian banks, including refusing to process transactions involving Iranian banks when full information regarding the parties to the transaction is unavailable. The FATF guidance also recommends that jurisdictions encourage their financial institutions to reassess, and if necessary, terminate correspondent relationships with Iranian banks, and take steps to satisfy themselves that their correspondent relationships with non-Iranian financial institutions are not used to circumvent the risk-mitigation practices in place for Iranian banks.
Iranian Commercial Banks. It has been a standard practice for Iranian financial institutions to conceal their identity to evade detection when conducting transactions. For example, Bank Sepah has requested that its name be removed from transactions in order to make it more difficult for intermediary financial institutions to determine the true parties to a transaction. Following the designation of Bank Sepah under UNSCR 1747, Bank Melli took precautions not to identify Bank Sepah in transactions. Bank Melli also has employed similar deceptive practices to obscure its involvement from the international banking system when handling financial transactions on behalf of the IRGC. In addition, when Iranian assets were targeted in Europe, branches of Iranian state-owned banks in
Central Bank of
Use of Front Companies and Misuse of Bank Accounts.
Use of Money Service Business Accounts.
Effect of the Revocation of U-Turn License
OFAC has revoked the authorization of "U-turn" transfers for the direct or indirect benefit of Iran, through an amendment of the Iranian Transactions Regulations, 31 CFR part 560, to narrow the scope of existing 560.516. This action affects the "U-turn" class of funds transfers, which are so named because, while they are conducted on behalf of Iranian account holders and banks or in connection with Iran-related transactions, they only pass through the U.S. financial system on their way from one offshore non-Iranian financial institution to another.
As a result of today's action,
Allowable Transactions
Today's action will not affect funds transfers by U.S. depository institutions, through intermediary third-country banks, to or from Iran or for the direct or indirect benefit of the Government of Iran or a person in Iran arising from several types of underlying transactions including:
- A non-commercial remittance to or from
- The exportation to
- A travel-related remittance;
- Payment for the shipment of a donation of articles to relieve human suffering; or
- An underlying transaction authorized by OFAC through a specific or general license. Allowable funds transfers would include, for example, payments arising from over-flights of Iranian airspace, legal services, intellectual property protection, and authorized sales of agricultural products, medicine, and medical devices to
Treasury Revokes Iran's U-Turn License
Washington,
Treasury's move today follows a series of
Prior to today's action, U.S. financial institutions were authorized to process certain funds transfers for the direct or indirect benefit of Iranian banks, other persons in Iran or the Government of Iran, provided such payments were initiated offshore by a non-Iranian, non-U.S. financial institution and only passed through the U.S. financial system en route to another offshore, non-Iranian, non-U.S. financial institution. As a result of today's action,
The Treasury Department previously designated Iranian state-owned banks Melli, Mellat, Sepah, Future Bank and the Export Development Bank of Iran for their roles in Iran's weapons proliferation activities, as well as Bank Saderat for providing support to terrorism. While these banks are already prohibited from taking advantage of the U-turn authorization, today's action ends this exception for all remaining Iranian banks, both state-owned and private, including the Central Bank of Iran.
As a member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the
To ensure that transactions relating to humanitarian aid for the Iranian people and other legitimate activities continue to flow, today's action will not affect funds transfers by
- Payment for the shipment of a donation of articles to relieve human suffering;
- A non-commercial remittance to or from
- The exportation to
- Travel-related remittances; and
- An underlying transaction authorized by Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) through a specific or general license.
Allowable funds transfers under specific or general OFAC licenses would include: payments arising from over-flights of Iranian airspace; legal services; intellectual property protection; and authorized sales of agricultural products, medicine, and medical devices to
This action will take effect when the amendment to the regulations is published in the Federal Register on November 10, 2008.
Prepared Remarks of
Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey
On the Revocation of Iran's U-Turn License
Washington,
Since that time, we have shared information with foreign governments and financial institutions about how
Combined with this outreach, the
At the same time, many private financial institutions and companies worldwide have voluntarily shunned business with
There is now a global consensus that
In the face of all of this,
As members of the FATF, we are fulfilling our obligation to strengthen measures to protect our financial sector from those risks. Therefore, today we are revoking the "U-turn" license for
In recent months, many
We encourage all countries, both FATF members and others, to take action to protect the integrity of their financial systems from
Today's action is not aimed at the innocent people of
To ensure that we can continue to help the Iranian people, today's action does not affect otherwise permissible payments such as for shipments of food and medicine, family remittances, and the export of informational materials to Iran, among others.
The Iranian regime's policies have ensured
on Saturday, May 5, 2012
By Morton Saulo
Victims of terrorist attacks on American embassies in Africa have filed a $40 billion lawsuit against the Republic of Sudan and the Islamic Republic of Iran for their complicity in the attack.
Mr Gavriel Mairone, counsel for the victims, announced that a lawsuit was filed on Tuesday in Federal District Court in Washington DC, on behalf of over 270 employees of the US government (and their family members) that were killed or seriously injured in the Al Qaeda suicide bombings against American embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.
On August 7, 1998, Al Qaeda perpetrated simultaneous suicide truck bombings on both embassies, killing 247 people and injuring more than 5,000.
Act amended
In January 2008, the US Federal Sovereign Immunity Act was amended to strip states supporting terrorism of immunity and grant employees and contractors of the United States government (in addition to US citizens) the right to sue in US federal court such states for damages resulting from terrorist attacks perpetrated anywhere in the world.
For the first time, survivors and family members of US government employees killed and maimed in the US Embassy bombings in Africa became eligible to seek compensation from the Republic of Sudan and the Islamic Republic of Iran in US federal court.
In December 2004, Mann & Mairone, together with other attorneys, filed an historic, multi-billion dollar lawsuit in US Federal court in New York against Arab Bank on behalf of over 2,000 victims of terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades and the Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
Subsequent to the filing of this lawsuit, the US government fined Arab Bank more than $20 million in connection with money laundering and terrorist financing.
Source: The Standard
Victims of terrorist attacks on American embassies in Africa have filed a $40 billion lawsuit against the Republic of Sudan and the Islamic Republic of Iran for their complicity in the attack.
Mr Gavriel Mairone, counsel for the victims, announced that a lawsuit was filed on Tuesday in Federal District Court in Washington DC, on behalf of over 270 employees of the US government (and their family members) that were killed or seriously injured in the Al Qaeda suicide bombings against American embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania.
On August 7, 1998, Al Qaeda perpetrated simultaneous suicide truck bombings on both embassies, killing 247 people and injuring more than 5,000.
Act amended
In January 2008, the US Federal Sovereign Immunity Act was amended to strip states supporting terrorism of immunity and grant employees and contractors of the United States government (in addition to US citizens) the right to sue in US federal court such states for damages resulting from terrorist attacks perpetrated anywhere in the world.
For the first time, survivors and family members of US government employees killed and maimed in the US Embassy bombings in Africa became eligible to seek compensation from the Republic of Sudan and the Islamic Republic of Iran in US federal court.
In December 2004, Mann & Mairone, together with other attorneys, filed an historic, multi-billion dollar lawsuit in US Federal court in New York against Arab Bank on behalf of over 2,000 victims of terrorist attacks perpetrated by Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyr Brigades and the Popular Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine.
Subsequent to the filing of this lawsuit, the US government fined Arab Bank more than $20 million in connection with money laundering and terrorist financing.
Source: The Standard
A U.S. appeals court upheld a decision holding three U.S. Islamic charities liable for the shooting by Hamas of a U.S.-born yeshiva student in Israel.
The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago reaffirmed the $156 million judgment against the American Muslim Society, the Islamic Association for Palestine-National and the Quranic Literacy Institute. The decision stated that the charities must be held liable if they gave money to groups engaged in terrorist acts, even if they meant the funds to be used for humanitarian purposes, The Associated Press reported.
The original case was filed by the parents of David Boim, a 17-year-old yeshiva student who was killed in a Hamas drive-by shooting in 1996 while standing at a bus stop in the West Bank. The Boim family lawyer called Wednesday's decision the most important judicial opinion on liability for terrorist financing ever decided by a U.S. court.
The appeals court also reversed a previous ruling on the liability of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, sending the case against that charity back to a lower court for trial. Holy Land had objected to the trial judge ruling against the charity via summary judgment without a trial.
The appeals court also ruled that a fifth defendant, Muhammed Salah, should not be held liable because he was in jail at the time of the passage of the U.S. anti-terrorism law that formed the basis for the suit.
Source: JTA
The U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago reaffirmed the $156 million judgment against the American Muslim Society, the Islamic Association for Palestine-National and the Quranic Literacy Institute. The decision stated that the charities must be held liable if they gave money to groups engaged in terrorist acts, even if they meant the funds to be used for humanitarian purposes, The Associated Press reported.
The original case was filed by the parents of David Boim, a 17-year-old yeshiva student who was killed in a Hamas drive-by shooting in 1996 while standing at a bus stop in the West Bank. The Boim family lawyer called Wednesday's decision the most important judicial opinion on liability for terrorist financing ever decided by a U.S. court.
The appeals court also reversed a previous ruling on the liability of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, sending the case against that charity back to a lower court for trial. Holy Land had objected to the trial judge ruling against the charity via summary judgment without a trial.
The appeals court also ruled that a fifth defendant, Muhammed Salah, should not be held liable because he was in jail at the time of the passage of the U.S. anti-terrorism law that formed the basis for the suit.
Source: JTA
on Friday, May 4, 2012
Friday, 04 January 2008
by William Fisher
The government’s spotty record in obtaining convictions of people charged with providing “material support” to terrorist organizations is adding new impetus to the efforts of prominent constitutional lawyers to seek substantial changes in the law.
The latest failure in a terrorism-financing prosecution came late in 2007, when a Texas jury failed to render any guilty verdicts in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) – once the largest and most prominent charity dedicated to supporting Palestinian and other Muslim causes. Several HLF officials were charged with giving money to Hamas, the militant Palestinian organization designated a terrorist group by the U.S. in 1995. The trial ended with a mix of acquittals and deadlocks.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation started looking into HLF in 1993. In December 2001, the U.S. Treasury Department (DOT) seized and confiscated the charity’s assets and records, effectively putting the organization out of business. Given that outcome, some legal scholars have questioned why the government pursued a criminal prosecution at all. The trial did not begin until mid-2007.
William Neal, a juror in the HLF case, told the media that the government’s evidence “was pieced together over the course of a decade — a phone call this year, a message another year.” Instead of trying to prove that the defendants knew they were supporting terrorists, Mr. Neal said, prosecutors “danced around the wire transfers by showing us videos of little kids in bomb belts and people singing about Hamas, things that didn’t directly relate to the case.”
Civil liberties groups say the HLF case was just the latest in a line of misguided prosecutions. One such group, OMB Watch, charges that the USA Patriot Act gives the government “largely unchecked power to designate any group as a terrorist organization.” It says that “once a charitable organization is so designated, all of its materials and property may be seized and its assets frozen. The charity is unable to see the government’s evidence and thus understand the basis for the charges. Since its assets are frozen, it lacks resources to mount a defense. And it has only limited right of appeal to the courts. So the government can target a charity, seize its assets, shut it down, obtain indictments against its leaders, but then delay a trial almost indefinitely.”
One result, say critics of the government’s policy, is that Muslim charities have experienced a precipitous decline in contributions. Contributions that do arrive often come in cash from anonymous givers. And donors who happen to be Muslim are increasingly turning to the large household names like Oxfam and Save the Children, which may conduct programs in predominantly Muslim areas abroad.
One of America’s foremost constitutional scholars, Prof. David Cole of the Georgetown University Law Center, argues that the “material support principle is ‘guilt by association’ in 21st-century garb, and presents all of the same problems that criminalizing membership and association did during the Cold War.” He told us that the problem requires fundamental changes in the terrorism-financing law.
Included in Cole’s recommendations for major changes:
1. The Treasury Department should be required to permit closed charities to direct their collected funds to charities mutually approved by the frozen charity and the government.
2. Congress should enact a statutory definition of a "specially designated terrorist." “Right now the Treasury Department makes such designations entirely on the basis of an Executive Order, and accordingly Congress has given the President essentially a blank check,” Cole told us.
3. Treasury should allow designated entities to use their own funds to pay for their own defense. “Treasury not only shuts down charities in a secretive one-sided process, but then bars the charities from using any of their own money to defend themselves against the designation,” according to Cole.
4. The criminal material support statutes should be amended to require proof that an individual supported a proscribed group with the intent to further its illegal activities. “Today,” according to the government, “even aid intended to discourage terrorist activities is a crime under the material support laws,” Cole says.
He adds, “There is no requirement that the aid have any connection to terrorism,” and cites a case he is handling with the Humanitarian Law Project (HLP) at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR).
He told us, “My clients had been providing human rights advocacy training to the PKK in Turkey, as a way of encouraging them to use peaceful lawful means to resolve their disputes with the Turkish government over its treatment of the Kurdish minority. By encouraging lawful outlets for dispute resolution, such aid would presumably discourage terrorism. Yet under the material support statute it is a crime even if HLP could prove that both the purpose and the effect of their support was to decrease the PKK's resort to violence.”
OMB Watch says the “material support” effort has resulted in the government shutting down charities that were not on any government watch list before their assets were frozen.
The organization says the result is that Muslims have no way of knowing which groups the government suspects of ties to terrorism. “Organizations and individuals suspected of supporting terrorism are guilty until proven innocent,” it says.
OMB Watch told us, “A group could comply 100% and still be shut down ‘pending an investigation’."
Material-support cases are just a small fraction of the Justice Department’s terrorism prosecutions, but some observers believe they represent a shift in government strategy from punishment to prevention. Earlier prosecutions were for acts of violence that actually took place. Examples include the first World Trade Center attack, the 1998 bombings of American embassies in Africa, and conspiracies that were relatively close to fruition.
Nonetheless, government terror-financing prosecutions have been reasonably successful. From the Sept. 11 attacks to last July, the government started 108 material-support prosecutions and completed 62. Juries convicted nine defendants, 30 defendants pleaded guilty, and 11 pleaded guilty to other charges. There were eight acquittals and four dismissals.
In terrorism prosecutions involving a violent act actually committed or near fruition, the government’s record is spottier. According to the Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law, the government has a 29 percent conviction rate in terrorism prosecutions overall, compared with 92 percent for felonies generally.
The latest government setback involves the so-called Liberty City Seven – seven men named for the blighted Miami district where they allegedly operated. Charged with plotting to join forces with al-Qaeda to blow up Chicago's Sears Tower, one was acquitted last month and a mistrial was declared for the six others after the federal jury deadlocked.
Prosecutors acknowledged that no attack was imminent, and then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said after the arrests in mid-2006 that the alleged terror cell was ''more aspirational than operational.''
In some cases, defendants are arguably convicted of terror-related offenses in the court of public opinion rather than in the courts. One example often cited by lawyers is the case of Dr. Rafil Dhafir, an Iraqi-born American citizen, who organized and raised money for a charity providing humanitarian relief to children in Iraq. He was never charged in court with a terrorist-related offense; the word “terrorism” was not allowed to be used in his trial, although prominent politicians such as then-New York Governor George Pataki hailed his arrest as a victory in the war on terror.
The upstate New York oncologist was sentenced to 22 years in jail in 2005 for 59 felony charges, including violating U.S. sanctions against Iraq.
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3179/32/
by William Fisher
The government’s spotty record in obtaining convictions of people charged with providing “material support” to terrorist organizations is adding new impetus to the efforts of prominent constitutional lawyers to seek substantial changes in the law.
The latest failure in a terrorism-financing prosecution came late in 2007, when a Texas jury failed to render any guilty verdicts in the trial of the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) – once the largest and most prominent charity dedicated to supporting Palestinian and other Muslim causes. Several HLF officials were charged with giving money to Hamas, the militant Palestinian organization designated a terrorist group by the U.S. in 1995. The trial ended with a mix of acquittals and deadlocks.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation started looking into HLF in 1993. In December 2001, the U.S. Treasury Department (DOT) seized and confiscated the charity’s assets and records, effectively putting the organization out of business. Given that outcome, some legal scholars have questioned why the government pursued a criminal prosecution at all. The trial did not begin until mid-2007.
William Neal, a juror in the HLF case, told the media that the government’s evidence “was pieced together over the course of a decade — a phone call this year, a message another year.” Instead of trying to prove that the defendants knew they were supporting terrorists, Mr. Neal said, prosecutors “danced around the wire transfers by showing us videos of little kids in bomb belts and people singing about Hamas, things that didn’t directly relate to the case.”
Civil liberties groups say the HLF case was just the latest in a line of misguided prosecutions. One such group, OMB Watch, charges that the USA Patriot Act gives the government “largely unchecked power to designate any group as a terrorist organization.” It says that “once a charitable organization is so designated, all of its materials and property may be seized and its assets frozen. The charity is unable to see the government’s evidence and thus understand the basis for the charges. Since its assets are frozen, it lacks resources to mount a defense. And it has only limited right of appeal to the courts. So the government can target a charity, seize its assets, shut it down, obtain indictments against its leaders, but then delay a trial almost indefinitely.”
One result, say critics of the government’s policy, is that Muslim charities have experienced a precipitous decline in contributions. Contributions that do arrive often come in cash from anonymous givers. And donors who happen to be Muslim are increasingly turning to the large household names like Oxfam and Save the Children, which may conduct programs in predominantly Muslim areas abroad.
One of America’s foremost constitutional scholars, Prof. David Cole of the Georgetown University Law Center, argues that the “material support principle is ‘guilt by association’ in 21st-century garb, and presents all of the same problems that criminalizing membership and association did during the Cold War.” He told us that the problem requires fundamental changes in the terrorism-financing law.
Included in Cole’s recommendations for major changes:
1. The Treasury Department should be required to permit closed charities to direct their collected funds to charities mutually approved by the frozen charity and the government.
2. Congress should enact a statutory definition of a "specially designated terrorist." “Right now the Treasury Department makes such designations entirely on the basis of an Executive Order, and accordingly Congress has given the President essentially a blank check,” Cole told us.
3. Treasury should allow designated entities to use their own funds to pay for their own defense. “Treasury not only shuts down charities in a secretive one-sided process, but then bars the charities from using any of their own money to defend themselves against the designation,” according to Cole.
4. The criminal material support statutes should be amended to require proof that an individual supported a proscribed group with the intent to further its illegal activities. “Today,” according to the government, “even aid intended to discourage terrorist activities is a crime under the material support laws,” Cole says.
He adds, “There is no requirement that the aid have any connection to terrorism,” and cites a case he is handling with the Humanitarian Law Project (HLP) at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR).
He told us, “My clients had been providing human rights advocacy training to the PKK in Turkey, as a way of encouraging them to use peaceful lawful means to resolve their disputes with the Turkish government over its treatment of the Kurdish minority. By encouraging lawful outlets for dispute resolution, such aid would presumably discourage terrorism. Yet under the material support statute it is a crime even if HLP could prove that both the purpose and the effect of their support was to decrease the PKK's resort to violence.”
OMB Watch says the “material support” effort has resulted in the government shutting down charities that were not on any government watch list before their assets were frozen.
The organization says the result is that Muslims have no way of knowing which groups the government suspects of ties to terrorism. “Organizations and individuals suspected of supporting terrorism are guilty until proven innocent,” it says.
OMB Watch told us, “A group could comply 100% and still be shut down ‘pending an investigation’."
Material-support cases are just a small fraction of the Justice Department’s terrorism prosecutions, but some observers believe they represent a shift in government strategy from punishment to prevention. Earlier prosecutions were for acts of violence that actually took place. Examples include the first World Trade Center attack, the 1998 bombings of American embassies in Africa, and conspiracies that were relatively close to fruition.
Nonetheless, government terror-financing prosecutions have been reasonably successful. From the Sept. 11 attacks to last July, the government started 108 material-support prosecutions and completed 62. Juries convicted nine defendants, 30 defendants pleaded guilty, and 11 pleaded guilty to other charges. There were eight acquittals and four dismissals.
In terrorism prosecutions involving a violent act actually committed or near fruition, the government’s record is spottier. According to the Center on Law and Security at the New York University School of Law, the government has a 29 percent conviction rate in terrorism prosecutions overall, compared with 92 percent for felonies generally.
The latest government setback involves the so-called Liberty City Seven – seven men named for the blighted Miami district where they allegedly operated. Charged with plotting to join forces with al-Qaeda to blow up Chicago's Sears Tower, one was acquitted last month and a mistrial was declared for the six others after the federal jury deadlocked.
Prosecutors acknowledged that no attack was imminent, and then-Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said after the arrests in mid-2006 that the alleged terror cell was ''more aspirational than operational.''
In some cases, defendants are arguably convicted of terror-related offenses in the court of public opinion rather than in the courts. One example often cited by lawyers is the case of Dr. Rafil Dhafir, an Iraqi-born American citizen, who organized and raised money for a charity providing humanitarian relief to children in Iraq. He was never charged in court with a terrorist-related offense; the word “terrorism” was not allowed to be used in his trial, although prominent politicians such as then-New York Governor George Pataki hailed his arrest as a victory in the war on terror.
The upstate New York oncologist was sentenced to 22 years in jail in 2005 for 59 felony charges, including violating U.S. sanctions against Iraq.
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/3179/32/
on Thursday, May 3, 2012
A Palestinian official says Palestinian security forces in the West Bank seized $2.2 million in cash from Hamas in August.
The official says the money was taken in a crackdown on money laundering by the Islamic militants. He says that in one such scheme, Hamas uses West Bank traders importing goods from China. The official spoke Wednesday on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to release details of the crackdown.
The West Bank government of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has been going after Hamas since the Islamic militants seized control of Gaza in June 2007. Abbas' security forces have arrested scores of Hamas militants and closed Hamas-linked institutions. Israel has carried out a parallel campaign against Hamas.
Source: International Herald Tribune
The official says the money was taken in a crackdown on money laundering by the Islamic militants. He says that in one such scheme, Hamas uses West Bank traders importing goods from China. The official spoke Wednesday on condition of anonymity because he is not authorized to release details of the crackdown.
The West Bank government of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has been going after Hamas since the Islamic militants seized control of Gaza in June 2007. Abbas' security forces have arrested scores of Hamas militants and closed Hamas-linked institutions. Israel has carried out a parallel campaign against Hamas.
Source: International Herald Tribune
on Friday, January 27, 2012
By Ted Jeory
Barclays has given the Bradford and Bolton-based Ummah Welfare Trust just 30 days to move millions of pounds, but the bank has refused to explain why.
The charity says it raises funds for orphanages and other humanitarian aid projects in war torn countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Kashmir, Kosovo, Chechnya, Sudan, Iran and Iraq.
However, the Sunday Express has discovered that as part of its work, it also channels funds to controversial Palestinian charity Interpal, which is the subject of a current Charity Commission investigation over alleged improper links to Palestinian “terror” organisation Hamas, and whose own accounts were closed last month by Lloyds TSB.
In a further finding, the charity also openly advertises its close associations to the Al-Salah Society—also known as the Al-Salah Islamic Association—an organisation blacklisted last year by the US Treasury for being a charitable “front” for Hamas’s “terrorist agenda”.
American pressure is believed to be behind Barclays’s move, but the lack of any explanation from the bank has caused many in Britain’s Muslim communities to believe the decision is part of a wide-ranging “Zionist” attack by the City on Islam.
Supporters of the trust are now urging Muslims throughout Britain to trigger a wave of account closures in protest.
The Muslim Council of Britain has even called on Gordon Brown to intervene, saying Barclays’s “unjustified” decision has caused “anxiety” and “deep concern”.
The MCB’s deputy general secretary Dr Daud Abdullah said the Prime Minister should resist any pressure from foreign government that result only in discrimination.
He added that despite his warnings “the actions against Muslim charities are being escalated”.
The Ummah Welfare Trust claims the decision will harm “millions” of vulnerable people in 25 countries and it has warned Barclays that its reputation among worldwide Muslims could be ruined.
It is now urging Muslims to inundate Barclays chief executive John Varley with letters stating: “I would also request you to review your decision to avoid unnecessary disruption. Otherwise, I will urge all friends and colleagues to close their accounts with Barclays Bank.”
Six years ago, the Charity Commission froze the accounts of the Ummah Welfare Trust while investigators and police probed allegations that donations were being misused in Kashmir.
However, an eight-month commission inquiry was satisfied that “considerable aid” had been handed out in the region and investigators concluded they “did not find any evidence of any misapplication of the charity’s funds”.
The commission then allowed its operations to continue.
Since then, its donations have spiralled from £240,000 a year to more than £2.3milion, according to latest accounts.
Trustees say the bulk of the cash is sent to their flagship project in Pakistan, a “rehabilitation” academy for 1,000 orphans aged between eight and 14.
The accounts also show that during the past four years, the charity has also issued more than £200,000 in grants to Palestine and Lebanon via Interpal.
City legal sources believe British banks are becoming increasingly wary about how charity money is being used.
They say that bankers’ concerns follow an historic court decision in America last month when the Holy Land Foundation, once the US’s largest Muslim charity, was found guilty of illegally financing Hamas by about £8million.
“You can’t be a multinational bank and hope not to fall foul of the US’s anti-terrorism funding laws,” one source said.
“The Holy Land Foundation trial that has made it pretty clear to bankers that you can’t do Nelsonian Blindness about what these ‘charities’ are doing.”
Under UK law, banks must report any suspicions of laundering to the Government’s Serious Organised Crime Agency, which is unable to comment on any potential specific ongoing investigations.
A Barclays spokesman its decision was not “taken lightly”, while the Charity Commission confirmed there was no current investigation into the Ummah Welfare Trust.
Interpal chairman Ibrahim Hewitt said: “This is the latest case of Islamophobia within the banking sector. This is purely another attack against the Muslim community."
Source: Sunday Express
British muslims are organising a boycott of Barclays Bank after it closed the accounts of an Islamic charity that operates in some of the world’s terror hot spots.
Barclays has given the Bradford and Bolton-based Ummah Welfare Trust just 30 days to move millions of pounds, but the bank has refused to explain why.
The charity says it raises funds for orphanages and other humanitarian aid projects in war torn countries such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Palestine, Kashmir, Kosovo, Chechnya, Sudan, Iran and Iraq.
However, the Sunday Express has discovered that as part of its work, it also channels funds to controversial Palestinian charity Interpal, which is the subject of a current Charity Commission investigation over alleged improper links to Palestinian “terror” organisation Hamas, and whose own accounts were closed last month by Lloyds TSB.
In a further finding, the charity also openly advertises its close associations to the Al-Salah Society—also known as the Al-Salah Islamic Association—an organisation blacklisted last year by the US Treasury for being a charitable “front” for Hamas’s “terrorist agenda”.
American pressure is believed to be behind Barclays’s move, but the lack of any explanation from the bank has caused many in Britain’s Muslim communities to believe the decision is part of a wide-ranging “Zionist” attack by the City on Islam.
Supporters of the trust are now urging Muslims throughout Britain to trigger a wave of account closures in protest.
The Muslim Council of Britain has even called on Gordon Brown to intervene, saying Barclays’s “unjustified” decision has caused “anxiety” and “deep concern”.
The MCB’s deputy general secretary Dr Daud Abdullah said the Prime Minister should resist any pressure from foreign government that result only in discrimination.
He added that despite his warnings “the actions against Muslim charities are being escalated”.
The Ummah Welfare Trust claims the decision will harm “millions” of vulnerable people in 25 countries and it has warned Barclays that its reputation among worldwide Muslims could be ruined.
It is now urging Muslims to inundate Barclays chief executive John Varley with letters stating: “I would also request you to review your decision to avoid unnecessary disruption. Otherwise, I will urge all friends and colleagues to close their accounts with Barclays Bank.”
Six years ago, the Charity Commission froze the accounts of the Ummah Welfare Trust while investigators and police probed allegations that donations were being misused in Kashmir.
However, an eight-month commission inquiry was satisfied that “considerable aid” had been handed out in the region and investigators concluded they “did not find any evidence of any misapplication of the charity’s funds”.
The commission then allowed its operations to continue.
Since then, its donations have spiralled from £240,000 a year to more than £2.3milion, according to latest accounts.
Trustees say the bulk of the cash is sent to their flagship project in Pakistan, a “rehabilitation” academy for 1,000 orphans aged between eight and 14.
The accounts also show that during the past four years, the charity has also issued more than £200,000 in grants to Palestine and Lebanon via Interpal.
City legal sources believe British banks are becoming increasingly wary about how charity money is being used.
They say that bankers’ concerns follow an historic court decision in America last month when the Holy Land Foundation, once the US’s largest Muslim charity, was found guilty of illegally financing Hamas by about £8million.
“You can’t be a multinational bank and hope not to fall foul of the US’s anti-terrorism funding laws,” one source said.
“The Holy Land Foundation trial that has made it pretty clear to bankers that you can’t do Nelsonian Blindness about what these ‘charities’ are doing.”
Under UK law, banks must report any suspicions of laundering to the Government’s Serious Organised Crime Agency, which is unable to comment on any potential specific ongoing investigations.
A Barclays spokesman its decision was not “taken lightly”, while the Charity Commission confirmed there was no current investigation into the Ummah Welfare Trust.
Interpal chairman Ibrahim Hewitt said: “This is the latest case of Islamophobia within the banking sector. This is purely another attack against the Muslim community."
Source: Sunday Express
on Tuesday, January 17, 2012
US authorities Wednesday designated New York-based Assa Corp. as a "front company" of an Iranian state-owned bank linked to weapons proliferation, and moved to seize its assets.
The US Treasury said that Assa had funnelled funds to Bank Melli, branded by Washington and the European Union as a "proliferator" linked to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
"This scheme to use a front company set up by Bank Melli -- a known proliferator -- to funnel money from the United States to Iran is yet another example of Iran's duplicity," said the Treasury's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence Stuart Levey.
"The dangerous mix of proliferation and deception has led the United States, the European Union and Australia to designate Bank Melli, and the United Nations to issue a call for vigilance with respect to all Iranian banks," he said in a statement.
The Treasury charged that the bank provided financial services, including opening letters of credit and maintaining accounts, for Iranian front companies and entities engaged in proliferation activities.
In addition, Bank Melli has facilitated the purchase of sensitive materials utilized by Iran's nuclear and missile industries, and has handled transactions for other designated Iranian entities, including Bank Sepah, Defense Industries Organization, and the Shahid Hammat Industrial Group, the statement said.
The US Justice Department said separately Wednesday that it was pursuing legal action to seize ASSA's assets in New York.
They included a 40 percent interest in a 36-story office tower at the upscale Fifth Avenue in Manhattan, New York.
"In the forfeiture complaint, the United States seeks to forfeit all right, title and interest of Assa Corporation, Assa Company Limited, and Bank Melli in 650 Fifth Avenue Company, including 650 Fifth Avenue's interest in the building," a statement by the department said.
The United States also sought to seize funds that were seized from Assa Corp.'s bank accounts, it said.
Assa Corp.'s interest in 650 Fifth Avenue Company was "forfeitable as property involved in money laundering and a conspiracy to commit money laundering," it said.
Washington has steadily upped sanctions against Iranian entities in hopes of pressuring Tehran to pull back on its nuclear program -- which the US says is aimed at developing nuclear weapons -- and to halt its alleged support for groups Washington has labelled "terrorist," including Lebanon's Hezbollah and armed Palestinian groups.
Iran, a leading OPEC oil producer, denies it is seeking nuclear weapons and says its nuclear program aims to provide energy for its growing population when its reserves of fossil fuels run out.
Source: AFP
The US Treasury said that Assa had funnelled funds to Bank Melli, branded by Washington and the European Union as a "proliferator" linked to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs.
"This scheme to use a front company set up by Bank Melli -- a known proliferator -- to funnel money from the United States to Iran is yet another example of Iran's duplicity," said the Treasury's under secretary for terrorism and financial intelligence Stuart Levey.
"The dangerous mix of proliferation and deception has led the United States, the European Union and Australia to designate Bank Melli, and the United Nations to issue a call for vigilance with respect to all Iranian banks," he said in a statement.
The Treasury charged that the bank provided financial services, including opening letters of credit and maintaining accounts, for Iranian front companies and entities engaged in proliferation activities.
In addition, Bank Melli has facilitated the purchase of sensitive materials utilized by Iran's nuclear and missile industries, and has handled transactions for other designated Iranian entities, including Bank Sepah, Defense Industries Organization, and the Shahid Hammat Industrial Group, the statement said.
The US Justice Department said separately Wednesday that it was pursuing legal action to seize ASSA's assets in New York.
They included a 40 percent interest in a 36-story office tower at the upscale Fifth Avenue in Manhattan, New York.
"In the forfeiture complaint, the United States seeks to forfeit all right, title and interest of Assa Corporation, Assa Company Limited, and Bank Melli in 650 Fifth Avenue Company, including 650 Fifth Avenue's interest in the building," a statement by the department said.
The United States also sought to seize funds that were seized from Assa Corp.'s bank accounts, it said.
Assa Corp.'s interest in 650 Fifth Avenue Company was "forfeitable as property involved in money laundering and a conspiracy to commit money laundering," it said.
Washington has steadily upped sanctions against Iranian entities in hopes of pressuring Tehran to pull back on its nuclear program -- which the US says is aimed at developing nuclear weapons -- and to halt its alleged support for groups Washington has labelled "terrorist," including Lebanon's Hezbollah and armed Palestinian groups.
Iran, a leading OPEC oil producer, denies it is seeking nuclear weapons and says its nuclear program aims to provide energy for its growing population when its reserves of fossil fuels run out.
Source: AFP
on Saturday, January 14, 2012
By BOB DAVIS
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the heads of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank urged Israel's prime minister to ease Israeli pressure on the Palestinian banking system.
"We understand and appreciate Israel's legitimate security concerns," said Mr. Blair, who is now a Mideast negotiator, IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn and World Bank President Robert Zoellick in a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. But the three argued that Israel policies "undermine the viability of the Palestinian banking sector as a whole, greatly inhibit Palestinian-Israeli trade and divert resources away from the banking system toward unregulated informal channels."
Read the letter to Ehud Olmert from Tony Blair and others.
Additionally cash constraints in Gaza are "bound to seriously affect" the ability of Gazans "to cover basic needs," the letter said.
At issue is a tug-of-war over cash transfers from Israel to Gaza. Gaza's economy runs on shekels, the currency of Israel. In recent months, Israel has blocked the shipment of shekel bills into Gaza, saying the money winds up in the hands of Hamas, which controls the coastal strip and is considered by Israel and the U.S. to be a terrorist group.
Recently, Israel approved a cash shipment of 100 million shekels ($25.5 million) into Gaza, averting for the time being a banking crisis in the Palestinian territories. Without the necessary cash, Palestinian bankers feared a run on their banks.
Israeli banks, fearful of being sued for abetting terrorist financing, are also looking to end their banking relationship with Palestinian banks. If that were to occur, Palestinian banks would have a tough time handling payments from abroad.
As a result of the Israeli restrictions, "confidence in the formal banking sector (in Gaza) has been severely reduced," the three official argued. Those policies also have the effect of "favoring the emergence of a black market that is providing this liquidity at considerable premiums and through unregulated channels." Palestinian banking officials say that Gaza's southern border with Egypt is honeycombed with tunnels run by smugglers who bring in dollars and goods. Some of the tunnel operators provide make loans to Gaza residents.
The Israeli policies undermine Palestinian authorities on the West Bank who try to police against money laundering and terrorist financing in Gaza and the West Bank, the three said. "Thus, we seek the assistance and intervention of the Israeli authorities in resolving these matters expeditiously," the letter said. The West Bank is under the control of the Fatah party.
The Israeli government has been split on the banking issue, with Defense ministry officials arguing that squeezing the banks in Gaza will weaken Hamas, while finance and economic officials contend that the policies actually increase the Hamas's power.
Write to Bob Davis at bob.davis@wsj.com
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and the heads of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank urged Israel's prime minister to ease Israeli pressure on the Palestinian banking system.
"We understand and appreciate Israel's legitimate security concerns," said Mr. Blair, who is now a Mideast negotiator, IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn and World Bank President Robert Zoellick in a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. But the three argued that Israel policies "undermine the viability of the Palestinian banking sector as a whole, greatly inhibit Palestinian-Israeli trade and divert resources away from the banking system toward unregulated informal channels."
Read the letter to Ehud Olmert from Tony Blair and others.
Additionally cash constraints in Gaza are "bound to seriously affect" the ability of Gazans "to cover basic needs," the letter said.
At issue is a tug-of-war over cash transfers from Israel to Gaza. Gaza's economy runs on shekels, the currency of Israel. In recent months, Israel has blocked the shipment of shekel bills into Gaza, saying the money winds up in the hands of Hamas, which controls the coastal strip and is considered by Israel and the U.S. to be a terrorist group.
Recently, Israel approved a cash shipment of 100 million shekels ($25.5 million) into Gaza, averting for the time being a banking crisis in the Palestinian territories. Without the necessary cash, Palestinian bankers feared a run on their banks.
Israeli banks, fearful of being sued for abetting terrorist financing, are also looking to end their banking relationship with Palestinian banks. If that were to occur, Palestinian banks would have a tough time handling payments from abroad.
As a result of the Israeli restrictions, "confidence in the formal banking sector (in Gaza) has been severely reduced," the three official argued. Those policies also have the effect of "favoring the emergence of a black market that is providing this liquidity at considerable premiums and through unregulated channels." Palestinian banking officials say that Gaza's southern border with Egypt is honeycombed with tunnels run by smugglers who bring in dollars and goods. Some of the tunnel operators provide make loans to Gaza residents.
The Israeli policies undermine Palestinian authorities on the West Bank who try to police against money laundering and terrorist financing in Gaza and the West Bank, the three said. "Thus, we seek the assistance and intervention of the Israeli authorities in resolving these matters expeditiously," the letter said. The West Bank is under the control of the Fatah party.
The Israeli government has been split on the banking issue, with Defense ministry officials arguing that squeezing the banks in Gaza will weaken Hamas, while finance and economic officials contend that the policies actually increase the Hamas's power.
Write to Bob Davis at bob.davis@wsj.com
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Israeli restrictions on cash shipments to Gaza banks, meant to weaken the territory's Hamas rulers, are largely counterproductive and ultimately harm Palestinian moderates, top international aid officials warned in a letter to Israel's prime minister.
The letter, obtained by The Associated Press, was signed by World Bank President Robert B. Zoellick, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn and international Mideast envoy Tony Blair. It marked the highest-level intervention on the issue yet, following a growing cash crunch in Gaza.
The three also expressed concern about a decision by two Israeli banks to sever correspondent relationships with Palestinian counterparts.
The two developments "may have a considerable impact on the Palestinian economy and its institutions, and ultimately on Israel's longer-term relationship with the Palestinians," the letter said.
In Israel, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni held consultations with senior advisers Sunday. She asked the director general of her ministry to come up with an action plan, both concerning the cash shipments and the banks' decision to cut ties with Palestinian counterparts.
Officials in her office said the matter is considered urgent, but no deadline was set for a decision.
Israel imposed restrictions on Gaza after the Islamic militant Hamas seized the territory in June 2007, ousting the forces of moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Israel declared Gaza a "hostile entity" and largely sealed its borders, allowing in only humanitarian supplies and a trickle of commercial goods, while banning exports from Gaza.
The long-term objective is to weaken and eventually topple Hamas, Israeli politicians have said. In the short run, the restrictions are used to pressure Gaza militants to halt rocket fire on Israeli border towns.
Despite the closures, Israel continued to send trucks carrying Israeli shekels into Gaza from time to time, in line with interim peace deal of the 1990s that made the shekel the currency in the Palestinian areas.
The cash shipments to Gaza banks are needed mainly to enable Abbas' West Bank-based prime minister, Salam Fayyad, to pay 77,000 government employees in Gaza who remain loyal to Abbas.
These payments help shore up support for Abbas in Gaza, sustain one-third of Gaza's 1.4 million people and prevent the collapse of the blockade-battered Gaza economy.
Following a new round of rocket attacks, Israel suspended cash shipments altogether, starting in October. By last week, Gaza banks only had 47 million shekels ($12 million, 9 million euros) in their vaults, less than one-fourth of what is needed to cover Fayyad's monthly payments to Gaza.
A few days later, Israel sent an emergency shipment of 100 million shekels ($26 million, 20 million euros) in bank notes, less than half of the 250 million shekels ($64 million, 48 million euros) requested by Fayyad. Government employees were able to withdraw only part of their salaries from the banks.
Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev said he expected Israel would send more shipments.
However, Oussama Kanaan, the chief IMF representative in the Palestinian territories, said Israel and the Palestinian Authority must reach a long-term agreement on regular monthly shipments of shekels. "People have to have some comfort that the same serious problems will not be recurring every month," he said.
A disruption of the cash flow will undermine the Palestinian banking sector as a whole, hurt trade between Israel and the Palestinian areas and divert resources to unregulated cash transactions, the aid officials wrote to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. "The aggregate, and no doubt, unintended result of those policies is to weaken the institutions of Prime Minister Fayyad's government ...," the officials wrote.
The letter also addressed the decision by Bank Hapoalim and Israel Discount Bank to sever ties with Palestinian banks by the end of the month. The banks are concerned they might run afoul of international anti-terrorism regulations by dealing with Gaza banks and thus be vulnerable to lawsuits. Once the ties are cut, it would be increasingly difficult for Israeli and Palestinian traders to do business.
The aid officials noted that severing the ties would undermine Palestinian banking institutions that "have imposed stringent laws against money-laundering and the financing of terrorism."
Source: The International Herald Tribune
The letter, obtained by The Associated Press, was signed by World Bank President Robert B. Zoellick, International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn and international Mideast envoy Tony Blair. It marked the highest-level intervention on the issue yet, following a growing cash crunch in Gaza.
The three also expressed concern about a decision by two Israeli banks to sever correspondent relationships with Palestinian counterparts.
The two developments "may have a considerable impact on the Palestinian economy and its institutions, and ultimately on Israel's longer-term relationship with the Palestinians," the letter said.
In Israel, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni held consultations with senior advisers Sunday. She asked the director general of her ministry to come up with an action plan, both concerning the cash shipments and the banks' decision to cut ties with Palestinian counterparts.
Officials in her office said the matter is considered urgent, but no deadline was set for a decision.
Israel imposed restrictions on Gaza after the Islamic militant Hamas seized the territory in June 2007, ousting the forces of moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Israel declared Gaza a "hostile entity" and largely sealed its borders, allowing in only humanitarian supplies and a trickle of commercial goods, while banning exports from Gaza.
The long-term objective is to weaken and eventually topple Hamas, Israeli politicians have said. In the short run, the restrictions are used to pressure Gaza militants to halt rocket fire on Israeli border towns.
Despite the closures, Israel continued to send trucks carrying Israeli shekels into Gaza from time to time, in line with interim peace deal of the 1990s that made the shekel the currency in the Palestinian areas.
The cash shipments to Gaza banks are needed mainly to enable Abbas' West Bank-based prime minister, Salam Fayyad, to pay 77,000 government employees in Gaza who remain loyal to Abbas.
These payments help shore up support for Abbas in Gaza, sustain one-third of Gaza's 1.4 million people and prevent the collapse of the blockade-battered Gaza economy.
Following a new round of rocket attacks, Israel suspended cash shipments altogether, starting in October. By last week, Gaza banks only had 47 million shekels ($12 million, 9 million euros) in their vaults, less than one-fourth of what is needed to cover Fayyad's monthly payments to Gaza.
A few days later, Israel sent an emergency shipment of 100 million shekels ($26 million, 20 million euros) in bank notes, less than half of the 250 million shekels ($64 million, 48 million euros) requested by Fayyad. Government employees were able to withdraw only part of their salaries from the banks.
Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev said he expected Israel would send more shipments.
However, Oussama Kanaan, the chief IMF representative in the Palestinian territories, said Israel and the Palestinian Authority must reach a long-term agreement on regular monthly shipments of shekels. "People have to have some comfort that the same serious problems will not be recurring every month," he said.
A disruption of the cash flow will undermine the Palestinian banking sector as a whole, hurt trade between Israel and the Palestinian areas and divert resources to unregulated cash transactions, the aid officials wrote to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. "The aggregate, and no doubt, unintended result of those policies is to weaken the institutions of Prime Minister Fayyad's government ...," the officials wrote.
The letter also addressed the decision by Bank Hapoalim and Israel Discount Bank to sever ties with Palestinian banks by the end of the month. The banks are concerned they might run afoul of international anti-terrorism regulations by dealing with Gaza banks and thus be vulnerable to lawsuits. Once the ties are cut, it would be increasingly difficult for Israeli and Palestinian traders to do business.
The aid officials noted that severing the ties would undermine Palestinian banking institutions that "have imposed stringent laws against money-laundering and the financing of terrorism."
Source: The International Herald Tribune
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
