Azərbaycan Respublikası Mərkəzi Bankı Banklara Nəzarət Departamenti



Yüklə 4,9 Kb.

səhifə22/36
tarix14.09.2018
ölçüsü4,9 Kb.
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   36

Supervision Department - AML/CFT Training 
Sanctions and Asset Freezing - Matches and Escalation
 
-
 Sufficient resources are available to identify ‗false 
positives‘. 
- After a breach, as well as meeting its formal 
obligation to notify the Asset Freezing Unit, the 
financial institution considers whether it should 
report the breach to the regulator. 
 
 
 
 
 
- The financial institution does not report a breach 
of the financial sanctions regime to the Asset 
Freezing Unit: this could be a criminal offense.   
-
 
An account is not frozen when a match with the 
Consolidated List is identified. If, as a 
consequence, funds held, owned or controlled by a 
designated person are dealt with or made available 
to the designated person, this could be a criminal 
offense.     
-
 
lack of resources prevents a financial institution 
from adequately analyzing matches.   
-
 
No audit trail of decisions where potential target 
matches are judged to be false positives.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Examples of GOOD Practice
 
2
 
When a customer‘s name matches a person on the Consolidated List it will often be a ‗false 
positive‘ (e.g. a customer has the same or similar name but is not the same person). Financial 
Institutions should have procedures for identifying where name matches are real and for freezing 
assets where this is appropriate.
 
Self-assessment questions:
 
• What steps does your financial institution take to identify whether a name match is real? (For 
example, does the financial institution look at a range of identifier information such as name, date 
of birth, address or other customer data?)
 
• Is there a clear procedure if there is a breach? (This might cover, for example, alerting senior 
management, the Treasury and the FSA, and giving consideration to a Suspicious Activity Report.)
 
 
 
 
 
Examples of POOR practice
 


Supervision Department - AML/CFT Training 
Sanctions and Asset Freezing - Weapons and Proliferation
 
- A bank has identified if its customers export goods 
to high-risk jurisdictions, and subjects transactions 
to enhanced scrutiny by identifying, for example, 
whether goods may be subject to export restrictions, 
or end-users may be of concern.   
- Where doubt exists, the bank asks the customer to 
demonstrate that appropriate assurances have been 
gained from relevant government authorities.   
- The financial institution has considered how to 
respond if the government takes action under the 
Counter Terrorism Act 2008 against one of its 
customers.
   
 
 
 
 
- The financial institution assumes customers selling 
goods to countries of concern will have checked the 
exports are legitimate, and does not ask for 
evidence of this from customers.   
- An insurer has not identified whether EU   
Regulation 961/2010 affects its relationship with   
its customers.   
- A financial institution knows that its customers 
deal with individuals and entities from high-risk 
jurisdictions but does not communicate with those 
customers about relevant regulations in place and 
how they affect them.   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Examples of GOOD Practice
 
2
 
Alongside financial sanctions, the government imposes controls on certain types of trade in order to achieve 
foreign policy objectives. The export of goods and services for use in nuclear, radiological, chemical or 
biological weapons programs is subject to strict controls. Financial Institutions‘ systems and controls should 
address the proliferation risks they face. 
Self-assessment questions: 

 
Does your financial institution finance trade with high-risk countries? If so, is enhanced due 
diligence carried out on counter parties and goods? Where doubt remains, is evidence sought from 
exporters that the trade is legitimate?   

 
Does your financial institution have customers from high-risk countries, or with a history of 
dealing with individuals and entities from such places? If so, has the financial institution reviewed 
how the sanctions situation could affect such counter parties, and discussed with them how they may 
be affected by relevant regulations?   

 
What other business takes place with high-risk jurisdictions, and what measures are in place to 
contain the risks of transactions being related to proliferation?   
 
 
Examples of POOR practice
 


Supervision Department - AML/CFT Training 
Sanctions and Asset Freezing - Case Study
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Examples of GOOD Practice
 
2
 
In August 2010, we fined Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) £5.6m for deficiencies in its systems and controls 
to prevent breaches of    financial sanctions. 

 
RBS failed adequately to screen its customers – and the payments they made and received – against 
the sanctions list, thereby running the risk that it could have facilitated payments to or from 
sanctioned people and organizations.   

 
The bank did not, for example, screen cross-border payments made by its customers in sterling or 
euros.   

 
It also failed to ensure its ‗fuzzy matching‘ software remained effective, and, in many cases, did not 
screen the names of directors and beneficial owners of customer companies.   
 
 
 
 
Examples of POOR practice
 




Dostları ilə paylaş:
1   ...   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   ...   36


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2019
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə