Avocat, rechtsanwalt or agent of the state?

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyse how lawyers in two of the largest European economies manage the contradictory requirements set by anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML/CTF) legislation on the one hand and professional codes of ethics on the other hand. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on qualitative interviews with French and German lawyers. It asks “How do European lawyers handle the conflicting demands ensuing from their roles as frontlines workers?” The paper uses lawyers’ day-to-day practices and variations in member states’ transpositions of the European Union directives as a starting point to study AML/CTF in the miniscule. Findings The article shows that contextual institutional restraints and cultural factors have significant impact on the possibility to enlist for-profit actors in the fight against terrorism an organised crime. Research limitations/implications This research highlights several factors inherent in AML/CTF regulation that warrant further research. Not only should further work be carried to broaden the understanding of lawyers but also other actors included in this policy area. Practical implications The study explains why French and German lawyers do not comply as expected by the legislator. If increased compliance is required, then the paper provides input into what measures can be taken, by policy, enforcement and supervision. Originality/value The study focusses on a hard-to-reach group of actors in AML/CTF regulation that has never before been studied in detail. As recent scandals have shown, lawyers are key actors in global finance but have rarely been scrutinised in their AML compliance norms and routines.

Arbitrators’ suspicion of money laundering: choices against principles

“…In the event that the arbitral tribunal becomes aware of genuine intentions by one or both parties to exploit the arbitral process for money laundering objectives, they may be accused of contravening antimoney laundering laws and the public policy of the jurisdiction where the arbitration is being conducted (Wronka, 2022; Dujovski and Mojsoska, 2019; Maguchu, 2017). The gravity of these allegations varies based on the legal framework governing such actions and the prevailing public policy (Mugarura, 2020; Svenonius and Mörth, 2020; Michelle Gallant, 2010). An even more precarious scenario emerges when the arbitral tribunal is cognizant that one or both parties are actively pursuing this objective and either providing assistance or expressing willingness to do so.…”

Personal responsibility and knowledge about money laundering: a study with Brazilian accountants

“…The classification of the crime of money laundering was accompanied by the imposition of an obligation for companies and professionals from specific segments to inform the control bodies about the occurrence of suspicious transactions related to crimes of money laundering, similar to the more developed markets (Krambia-Kapardis, 2020; Sultana, 2020; Svenonius and Mörth, 2020). This obligation transfers responsibility for the full performance of organizations and business environments to market agents.…”