Ethics and governance in the European Financial centers

As I already wrote, the "generous grant" that the FATF received from Luxembourg is a huge problem.


It seems that the Luxembourg government , seems did not communicate on the grant to the FATF whereas it communicates for other grants with a specific press release.

The grant is actually mentioned is the report of the Fonds de Lutte contre le trafic des stupéfiants 2006 as the projet GAFInet for an amount of 65000 EUR. The problem is that
- grants are not part of the funding as stated by the FATF itself,
- such grants from member states should not be accepted because of the role of the FATF acting as an auditor,
- Luxembourg seems to be the only giver of such grants as it is the only member state mentioned in the FATF report for a grant,
- by accepting the FATF disregarded that Luxembourg does not care of the implementation of the GRECO and OECD Recs including provisions relating to AML and that there are many dysfunctions in the jurisdiction it could not ignore, and later promoted Luxembourg and its behaviour by stating in the report "thanks to a generous grant from Luxembourg..." giving therefore de facto a recognition while not respecting international rules.

It is essential for the FATF to tighten up the ship and analyse the internal responsibilities for a situation that is not acceptable from an ethical point of view.



Examples of communication (French text):
Tsunami
Doha Program
Palestinians


etc