A ‘Risky’ Risk Approach: Proportionality in ML/TF Regulation

  • van Duyne P
  • Harvey J
  • Gelemerova L
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Proportionality matters in the relationship between the government and the public. Though it is not operationalised, it evolves alongside political and legislative developments. However, in the field of money laundering, it is questionable whether this principle is met. A review of the Regulatory Impact Assessments for UK Money Laundering Regulations in 1993 and 2001 showed costs to be significantly understated and benefits unquantified, merely promising sweeping protections for society. This way of dealing with proportionality to justify enhanced measures reduces it to an empty formula. We are of the opinion that the proportionality principle is too important to be ignored, especially in the (global) anti-money laundering (AML) policy which since 2001 additionally encompasses the financing of terrorism. This regime has now been made more targeted by the new risk-based approach. The question is whether this approach has achieved the right proportionality.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

van Duyne, P. C., Harvey, J., & Gelemerova, L. (2018). A ‘Risky’ Risk Approach: Proportionality in ML/TF Regulation. In The Palgrave Handbook of Criminal and Terrorism Financing Law (pp. 345–374). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64498-1_15

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free