Know Your Prospective Client – FATF Requirement for Lawyers

[This publication is expected to be part of a book written by the author].

As a lawyer, before you begin a formal relationship with your clients, know your prospective clients well. Who are they, where are they from and what are their sources of income? Don’t worry, they will not run away because of such questions if you have good communication skills. Note down your prospective client’s full name, parentage, telephone number, email address, complete present and permanent address and another person’s contact details in case you are unable to contact him or her. It may be a bit difficult but you should also conduct an inquiry about their background, especially if they have a criminal record. Different web-based and physical solutions exist in Pakistan to perform these checks.[1] Banks, certain organizations and Security Exchanges are already performing such checks under different national and international regulations.[2] Certain laws of the land are relevant in this regard.[3] Similarly, certain guidelines from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), such as the FATF Recommendations and FATF Guidance[4] as applied within certain jurisdictions, are also relevant. However, these recommendations have no binding effect on the bar councils and bar associations which are governed by the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 and subordinate legislation. This Act and its subordinate legislation prescribes the obligations of lawyers, defines conduct which amounts to a violation of statutory and ethical requirements and prescribes special procedures with respect to disciplinary proceedings, etc. Needless to mention, an Act passed by a national Parliament is always superior to any ‘recommendation’ or ‘regulation’. A ‘regulation’ may be in the form of subordinate legislation, having no overriding effect on an Act of Parliament, whereas a ‘recommendation’ is not legislation and may be in the form of a suggestion for the legislators to legislate upon. By its own effect, it cannot bind the legislators into being considered. They can simply opt out of it.

The Financial Action Task Force’s Recommendations originated in 1990 and were specifically directed at the financial sector. In 1996, they were reviewed and in 2001, eight special recommendations on terrorist financing were added. In 2003, through another revision, the term “gatekeepers” was coined which pertained to the bodies that provided “access points” to financial systems. Lawyers were considered to be among those “gatekeepers”. Later, in 2012, the (present) 40 recommendations coined another term, “Designated Non-Financial Business and Professions” (DNFBPs) and widened the concept of gatekeepers which, however, remained hotly debated among bar associations worldwide. The term has been defined further by the FATF in the following words:

“Designated non-financial businesses and professions means:

(e) Lawyers, notaries, other legal professionals and accountants – this refers to sole practitioners, partners or employed professionals within professional firms. It is not meant to refer to ‘internal’ professionals that are employees of other types of businesses, nor to professionals working for government agencies, who may already be subject to AML/CFT measures.”[5]

As per Section 2(xii)(c) of Pakistan’s Anti Money Laundering Act, 2010 (Act No.VII of 2010), lawyers, notaries, accountants and other legal professionals who carry out monetary transactions for their clients concerning the following are termed as DNFBPs:

“(I) managing, operating, buying and selling of real estate, legal persons and legal arrangements and preparing documents therefor;

(II) managing of Client Money, Securities or other assets;

(III) managing bank, savings or securities accounts; or

(IV) organizing contributions for the creation, operation or management of companies.”

These lawyers, including property/real estate lawyers, notaries and law firms, are also supposed to carry out “customer due diligence” (CDD). The CDD and its obligations have been defined in Act No.VII of 2010 in the following manner:

“2(vi) “CDD” means customer due diligence and the obligations set out in section 7A…”

---

“7A. Conducting CDD.

(1) every reporting entity shall conduct CDD in the manner as may be prescribed and in accordance with provisions of this Act in the following matters, namely: 

• entering a business relationship;
• conducting an occasional transaction of money laundering or terrorist financing; or
• where there is a suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing; or
• where there are doubts about the veracity or adequacy of previously obtained data.
• Every reporting entity shall —
• Identify the customer and verify the customer’s identity on the basis of documents, data or informations obtained from reliable and independent sources;
• Identify the beneficial owner’s identity on the basis of documents, data or information obtained from reliable sources and be satisfied that it knows who the beneficial owner is;
• Understand and, as appropriate, obtain information on the purpose and intended nature of the business relationship; and monitor the business relationship on an ongoing basis.”

“Know Your Customer” or “Customer Due Diligence” (KYC/CDD) is being considered as an international requirement to avoid the risk of money laundering/terrorist financing (ML/TF) and other related risks. Lawyers and law firms are also supposed to implement KYC checks before entering into a formal relationship with their clients.

Another term, “Self-Regulatory Body” (SRB) has been coined by the Act No.VII of 2010, which reads as follows:

“2(xxxix) “SRB” means a self-regulatory body as mentioned in clause (2) of Schedule-IV of this Act…”

Among other SRBs, the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC) has also been included in Schedule-IV in the following words:

“2. The following SRBs are AML/CFT regulatory authorities for the purposes of this Act:

(iii) the Pakistan Bar Council established under the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 (Act XXXV of 1973); for lawyers and other independent legal professionals that are enrolled under the Pakistan Bar Council or Provincial Bar Councils or Islamabad Bar Council…”

There are also some serious reporting requirements, such as “Suspicious Transactions Reports” (STR) and “Cash Transactions Reports” (CTR) to be reported to a “Financial Management Unit” (FMU). These terms have been defined in the Act No.VII of 2010 in the following manner:

“2(xl). “STR” or “Suspicious Transactions Report” means the report on suspicious transaction as provided under section 7…”

---

“2(xi). “CTR” means report on currency transactions exceeding such amount as may be specified by the National Executive Committee by notification in the official Gazette…”

---

“2(xv) “FMU” means the Financial Monitoring Unit established under section 6…”

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) has now engulfed all countries, all sectors and all regimes to implement appropriate mitigation measures to reduce and counter money laundering and terrorist financing risks (ML/TF). The FATF has recommended certain tough measures for the whole world and has been forcing all countries/jurisdictions to comply with such recommendations. If a jurisdiction does not fulfill these requirements, it is put on the list of jurisdictions under increased monitoring, which is referred to as the “grey list”, while the “non-cooperative countries or territories” (NCCTs) are thrown on the list commonly termed as the “black list” with the harshest consequences. At the same time, these recommendations are shown to be ‘non-binding’.

The FATF has also published the Risk Based Approach (RBA) Guidance for legal professionals. This Guidance is said to be “non-binding and does not overrule the purview of national authorities.”[6] However, its footnote says that, “[n]ational authorities should however take the Guidance into account when carrying out their supervisory functions.”[7]

According to this FATF RBA Guidance:

“…competent authorities, supervisors and legal professionals should identify, assess, and understand the money laundering and terrorist financing (ML/TF) risks to which legal professionals are exposed, and implement appropriate mitigation measures.”[8]

The FATF has mentioned in its Guidance that it should be read in conjunction with Recommendations 1, 10, 11, 12, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, their Interpretative Notes (INR) and the following relevant documents and reports:[9]

1. The FATF Guidance on National Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Risk Assessment (February 2013);
2. FATF Guidance on Transparency and Beneficial Ownership (October 2014);
3. FATF Guidance on the Risk-Based Approach for Trust and Company Service Providers (TCSPs) (June 2019);
4. FATF Guidance on the Risk-Based Approach for Accountants (June 2019);
5. FATF Report on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing: Vulnerabilities of Legal Professionals (June 2013);and
6. The joint FATF and Egmont Group Report on Concealment of Beneficial Ownership (July 2018).

• Recommendation 1 is about “assessing risk and applying a risk-based approach”;
• Recommendation 10 is about “Customer Due Diligence”;
• Recommendation 11 is about “Record Keeping”;
• Recommendation 12 is about “Politically Exposed Persons”;
• Recommendation 15 is about “New Technologies”;
• Recommendation 17 pertains to “Reliance on Third Parties”;
• Recommendation 19 pertains to “Higher-Risk Countries”;
• Recommendation 20 is about “Reporting of Suspicious Transactions”;
• Recommendation 21 is about “Tipping Off and Confidentiality”;
• Recommendation 22 is about “DNFBPs: Customer Due Diligence”;
• Recommendation 23 pertains to “DNFBPs: Other Measures”;
• Recommendation 24 pertains to “Transparency and Beneficial Ownership of Legal Persons”;
• Recommendation 25 is about “Transparency and Beneficial Ownership of Legal Arrangements”; and
• Recommendation 28 pertains to “Regulation and Supervision of DNFBPs.”[10]

Recommendation 22 and its sub-recommendation (d) states the following:

“22. DNFBPs: customer due diligence 

The customer due diligence and record keeping requirements set out in Recommendations 10, 11, 12, 15, and 17, apply to designated non-financial businesses and professions (DNFBPs) in the following situations:

• Lawyers, notaries, other independent legal professionals and accountants when they prepare for or carry out transactions for their client concerning the following activities:

• buying and selling for real estate;
• managing of client money, securities or other assets;
• management of bank, savings or securities accounts;
• organisation of contributions for the creation, operation or management of companies;
• creation, operation or management of legal persons or arrangements and buying and selling of business entities.”[11]

The Interpretative Note to Recommendation 23 states the following:

1. “Lawyers, notaries, other independent legal professionals, and accountants acting as independent legal professionals, are not required to report suspicious transactions if the relevant information was obtained in circumstances where they are subject to professional secrecy or legal professional privilege. 
2. It is for each country to determine the matters that would fall under legal professional privilege or professional secrecy. This would normally cover information lawyers, notaries or other independent legal professionals receive from or obtain through one of their clients; (a) in the course of ascertaining the legal position of their client, or (b) in performing their task of defending or representing that client in, or concerning judicial, administrative, arbitration or mediation proceedings.
3. Countries may allow lawyers, notaries, other independent legal professionals and accountants to send their STR to their appropriate self-regulatory organisations and the FIU.
4. Where lawyers, notaries, other independent legal professionals and accountants acting as independent legal professionals seek to dissuade a client from engaging in illegal activity, this does not amount to tipping-off.”[12]

Apparently, the objective of this Guidance seems to be that national authorities are supposed to “take this Guidance into account while drawing up their own Guidance for the sector.”[13] The FATF Recommendations apply to those legal professionals who carry out specified financial, transactional activities for third parties. These Recommendations do not apply to litigation lawyers unless and until litigation lawyers, by themselves, engage in any specified transactional activity.[14] While discussing ‘legal professional privilege and professional secrecy’, the Guidance states that, “…each country needs to determine the matters that would fall under legal professional privilege or professional secrecy.”[15] Furthermore, the Guidance mentions again that, “…[t]his Guidance must be considered in the context of these professional and ethical codes of conduct.”[16] Time and again, the Guidance lays stress upon “ethical standards” and requires legal professionals to “…ensure that their services are not being misused, including by criminals, and they should carefully consider what they need to do to guard against that risk.”[17]

In order to mitigate risks, the “Risk Based Approach” (RBA) for legal practitioners requires the following:[18]

• Initial CDD;
• Ongoing monitoring;
• Internal policies; and
• Training and system to address vulnerabilities.

The risks that are required to be mitigated by legal practitioners have been categorized and mentioned in detail in the Guidance which should be read by all Pakistani legal professionals as it provides very good ethical standards and guidelines for adopting a further course of action to mitigate risks.

Notaries have also been included under DNFBPs. The Guidance distinguishes between “Civil Law Notaries” and “Common Law Notaries” with respect to their roles[19] and specially mentions that it does not cover common law notaries when they merely perform administrative tasks such as witnessing or authenticating documents. Witnessing and authenticating documents are not specified activities.[20] In Pakistan, most legal practitioners have a notary public licence, however, their major role is witnessing and authenticating documents. In very rare situations would a notary be involved in financial transactions or another kind of specified activity in Pakistan. The functions of Pakistani notaries have been prescribed under Section 8 of the Notaries Ordinance, 1961 which states the following:

“8. Functions of notaries.

(1) A notary may do all or any of the following acts by virtue of his office, namely: 

• verify, authenticate, certify or attest the execution of any instrument;
• present any promissory note, hundi or bill of exchange or protest for better security or prepare acts of honour under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881`, or serve notice of such note of protest;
• note or protest the dishonor by non-acceptance or non-payment of any promissory note, hundi or bill of exchange or protest for better security or prepare acts of honour under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, or serve notice of such note or protest;
• note and draw up ships protest, boats protest or protest relating to demurrage and other commercial matters;
• administer oath to , or take affidavit from, any person;
• prepare bottomry and respondentia bonds, charter parties and other mercantile documents;
• prepare, attest or authenticate any instrument intended to take effect in any country or place outside Pakistan in such form and language as may conform to the law of the place where such deed is intended to operate;
• translate, and verify the translation of, any document from one language into another;
• any other act which may be prescribed.
• No act specified in sub-section (1) shall be deemed to be a notarial act except when it is done by a notary public under his signature and official seal.”

The FATF Recommendations or the Anti Money Laundering Act, 2010 have no overriding effect on provincial law i.e. the Notaries Ordinance, 1961. The functions performed by Pakistani notaries are also different from the rest of the world, therefore, they should neither be included in the list of DNFBPs nor subjected to the FATF’s Recommendations.

Each and every lawyer and each and every bar council and bar association throughout Pakistan must study the RBA Guidance for Legal Professionals along with A Lawyer’s Guide to Detecting and Preventing Money Laundering published by a working group of ABA, IBA and CCBE. A more detailed reading of the Guidance reveals the ways in which the FATF has supposed the Recommendations to be implemented. While studying the Guidance, it must be kept in mind that nothing can be done without the Pakistan Bar Council. The PBC, in my view, can choose its own way or procedure and opt the extent to which these Recommendations may (or may not) be implemented. Legal professionals should not be hung on the same girdle as financial institutions. Legal professionals are at a low risk of being involved in money laundering and terrorist financing, thus, the Pakistan Bar Council may choose to not apply the FATF Recommendations stricto senso. However, it may consider the Recommendations and the RBA Guidance as guidelines to improve “ethical standards” within the legal profession.

The Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of Pakistan, being an oversight body of “Self Regulatory Bodies” (SRBs) of lawyers, has recently made “Oversight Body Regulations” for Pakistan Bar Council and proposed draft regulations titled the Anti Money Laundering and Combatting Financing of Terrorism AML-CFT Regulations for lawyers and other independent legal professionals (DNFBPs), 2021. However, the Pakistan Bar Council is yet to issue these regulations.[21]

These regulations, inter alia, provide provisions for the following:

• Customer Due Diligence,
• STR and CTR Reporting,
• TFS Obligations,
• Risk Assessment and Mitigation,
• Internal Controls,
• Record Keeping, and
• Sanctions.

“Customer Due Diligence” has been covered in these draft regulations[22] in the following words:

“3. Customer Due Diligence

(1) A lawyer shall not establish or maintain business relationship with clients anonymously or with fictitious name. 

(2) A lawyer shall undertake Customer Due Diligence (CDD) measures and assessment when he accepts a case, prepare for, or carries out a transaction concerning the following activities:

(a) buying and selling of real estate; 

(b) managing of client money, securities or other assets;

(c) management of bank, savings or securities accounts;

(d) organization of contributions for the creation, operation or management of companies; 

(e) creating, operating or management of legal persons or arrangements, and buying and selling of business entities.

(3) Customer Due Diligence or CDD entails:

(a) identification of client/customer ( whether natural or legal person or legal arrangement) and its verification of identity using reliable, independent source documents;

(b) identification and verification of identity of a person purporting to act on behalf of a client;

(c) in relation to legal persons and legal arrangements take reasonable measures to understand the nature of customer’s business and its ownership and control structure, identify customer and its beneficial owner and verify the identity of customer and the beneficial owners using relevant information or data obtained from a reliable source;

(d)  lawyer shall perform enhanced due diligence where the ML/TF risks are higher. Such enhanced due diligence may include obtaining additional information regarding purpose of transactions and source of funds;

(e)   the enhanced due diligence shall be applied while dealing with natural and legal persons of high risk countries and geographies identified by FATF, National Risk Assessment, and SRB’s risk assessment;

(f)  in case CDD process is not satisfactorily completed, business relationship should not be established and filing of STR may be considered;

(g) in case of suspicion of money laundering or terrorist financing and performing CDD process will tip-off the client, it is permitted not to pursue CDD process, and instead file an STR with FMU;

(h) conduct ongoing due diligence of all their customers including existing customers on the business relationship, to ensure that the transactions being conducted are in line with customer’s business, risk profile and source of funds; and

(i)  to carry out any other due diligence measures as and when required by the SRB under the Act.

(4) In relation to Politically Exposed Person (PEP) and their close associates or family members, the lawyer shall:

• Determine if a customer or beneficial owner if a PEP or subsequently becomes a PEP;
• Take reasonable measures to establish the source of wealth and the source of funds of customers and beneficial owners identified as PEPs;
• conduct enhanced ongoing monitoring of business relations with the customer; and
• Obtain senior management approval before establishing or continuing business relationship.”

“STR” stands for “Suspicious Transaction Reporting” and “CTR” stands for “Cash Transactions Reports”. STR and CTR have been dealt with in the proposed regulations in the following words:

“4, STR and CTR reporting.

(1) If a lawyer has reasonable grounds to suspect that funds are the proceeds of money laundering, terrorist financing, proliferation financing or other criminal activity, it shall promptly send STR to FMU. The lawyer is required to report all suspicious transactions, including attempted transactions, to FMU, to FMU, regardless of the amount involved.

(2) The filing of a STR shall not be disclosed.

(3) CTRs will be reported as required under Section 7 of the Act.”

The FATF has, in line with its Recommendation 6, published International Best Practices: Targeted Financial Sanction related to Terrorism and Terrorist Financing. Countries are required to comply with United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) relating to the prevention and suppression of terrorist financing, such as UNSCR 1267(1999), UNSCR 1373(2001) and any USCRs “which impose targeted financial sanctions (TFS) in the terrorist financing context.” Countries are required to freeze assets and take any other action in compliance with UNSCRs. However, the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 does not empower Pakistani lawyers to “freeze the assets”. These TFS Obligations have been dealt with in the draft regulations in the following words:

“5. TFS Obligations.

The lawyer shall ensure implementation of Targeted Financial Sanctions requirements including freezing of assets and any other action in line with United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) under United Nation Security Council Act, 1948 and Anti Terrorism Act 1997. Implementation of any such action taken shall be promptly reported to respective Bar Council and an STR shall also be filed to FMU.”

The provisions with respect to Risk Assessment and Mitigation have also been provided in the draft regulations, which actually enhance the obligations of lawyers. They have been dealt with in the following words:

“6. Risk Assessment and Mitigation.

(1) The lawyers shall take appropriate steps to identify, assess and understand their ML/TF risks. This includes:

• Consider all relevant factors before determining what is the level of overall risk and the appropriate level and type of mitigation to be applied;
• Keep these assessments up to date; and
• Have appropriate mechanisms to provide risk assessment information to respective bar Council.

(2) The lawyer shall:

• Have policies, controls and procedures, to enable them to manage the implementation of those policies and procedures and to enhance them if necessary; and
• Take enhanced measures to manage and mitigate the risks where higher risks are identified.”

Some enhanced responsibilities for lawyers, their businesses and their services with respect to Internal Controls and Record Keeping have also been covered in these draft regulations in the following words:

“7. Internal Controls.

(1) The lawyer shall develop and implement internal policies, procedures and controls in his services and business against ML/TF risks having regard to the ML/TF risk and the size of the business: 

• Compliance management arrangements;

• Screening procedures to ensure high standards when hiring employees;

• An ongoing employee training programme; and

• An independent audit function including assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness of the policies, controls and procedures and to make recommendations accordingly.
• The lawyer shall ensure that his foreign branches and majority-owned subsidiaries apply AML/CFT measures consistent with Pakistan requirements where the minimum AML/CFT requirements are less stringent than Pakistan.”

---

“8. Record Keeping.

(1) The lawyer shall maintain all necessary records of transactions at their registered office for a minimum period of five years from completion of the transaction 

—-correspondence, and results of any analysis undertaken for a minimum period of five years after the business relationship is terminated.

• The records shall be sufficient to permit reconstruction of transactions so as to provide, when necessary, evidence for prosecution of criminal act.
• The lawyer shall provide information (CDD and any other transaction), on timely basis to respective SRB, investigating and prosecuting agencies and FMU, for supply of CDD information as and when required under the law. ”

The draft regulations have provided the following provision for Sanctions:

“9. Sanctions.

Any violation of any provision of these regulations will be subject to sanctions in accordance with the AML/CFT Sanctions Rules, 2020 and penalties may be imposed by respective Bar Council according to Clause (h) of sub-section (2) of section 6A of the Act.”

It is submitted that these regulations have been drafted by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of Pakistan without adhering to the ground realities, traditional practical problems, limits faced by Pakistani lawyers and even the critical approaches to FATF Recommendations and the suggestions given by lawyers’ organizations worldwide. The Ministry, while showing compliance with FATF, has probably not appreciated that Pakistani lawyers are the creation of an Act of Parliament called the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 which does not provide for the type of harsh things that the FATF and the Ministry have suggested. This Act already defines wrongful conduct and provides penal provisions and special mechanisms.

No regulation can be passed without amending the basic provisions of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973 and this Act can only be amended with the consent of the Pakistan Bar Council. The Recommendations proposed by FATF and the regulations along with sanctions that have been proposed through these draft regulations cannot have an overriding effect on an already existing Act of Parliament. A statutory body can only be run by a single statute. Any other special legislation cannot impose its regulations on another statutory body. There is also great conflict of interest between the Anti Money Laundering Act, 2010 and the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973. Even the Recommendations and RBA Guidance are mere ethical suggestions. Any jumping reaction to such demands, without fully debating and analyzing the legal questions, legal implications, conflict of laws, riding or overriding effect, extent of application, choices available to the Pakistan Bar Council and the practical problems of Pakistani lawyers, would further frustrate and create chaos in the legal profession.

Bar associations worldwide have also posed serious reservations to these requirements. They, inter alia, base their arguments upon the concept of “privileged communication”. Lawyers are neither supposed to be financial supervisors nor answerable to any organization other than the Pakistan Bar Council, which is their only “Supervisory Body” and which has its own particular provisions for conducting disciplinary proceedings and its own appellate hierarchy. Similarly, a lawyer cannot be forced to aid the authorities by filing STR/CTR as it is the function of other departments and organizations. There is no need for the regulations proposed by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of Pakistan to the Pakistan Bar Council (PBC). The PBC may, if it feels necessary to include the non-binding ethical considerations of mitigating ML/FT risks at its end, amend Chapter XII of Ethics and Cannons of Advocacy as it exists in Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Rules, 1976 and the relevant provisions of the Legal Practitioners and Bar Councils Act, 1973.

A comprehensive training of lawyers should regularly be conducted on the subject till the time that all lawyers of Pakistan become fully conversant with the laws on the subject as well as the ML/FT risks associated with the legal profession. The proposed regulations cannot override an Act of Parliament. Pakistani lawyers and the Pakistan Bar Council may also take the aid of different guidelines published by different bar associations worldwide. One such publication is titled A Lawyer’s Guide to Detecting and Preventing Money Laundering, published in October, 2014. It has been prepared by working groups of the International Bar Association (IBA) (led by Stephen Revell), the American Bar Association (ABA) (led by Kevin Shepherd) and the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (CCBE) with the help of Dr. S.Chandra Mohan (Associate Professor of Law) and Lynn Kan (Juris Doctor), Singapore Management University, School of Law.

---

References

[1] For instance, inter alia, “Real Time KYC & AML Solutions For Pakistan”, ShuftiPro, accessed 08.05.2020, https://shuftipro.com/pakistan

There are many other organizations, which provide verification for different banks and organizations.

[2]   For instance: “Customer Due Diligence/Know Your Customer (CDD/KYC) Policy”, MRA Securities Ltd, accessed 08.05.2020,  https://mra.com.pk/downloads/KYC.pdf

[3] For example Anti-Terrorism Laws; Laws and Rules about Proscribed Persons and Organizations; Anti Money Laundering Laws.

[4] “Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is an independent inter-governmental body, which develops and promotes policies to protect global financial system against money laundering, terrorist financing and the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.” FATF has issued ‘guidance for a risk based approach for Legal Professionals on June 2019 for the implementation of FATF Recommendations, which can be downloaded from the website of FATF (see www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/fatfrecommendations/documents/rba-legal-professionals.html and FATF (2019), Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach for Legal Professionals, FATF, Paris, http://www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/documents/Guidance-RBA-legal-professionals.htmls

[5] FATF (2012-2018), International Standards on Combatting Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation, FATF, Paris, France, http://www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/documents/Guidance-RBA-legal-professionals.htmls, p.116

[6] Financial Action Task Force (FATF) is an independent inter-governmental body, which develops and promotes policies to protect global financial system against money laundering, terrorist financing and the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.” FATF has issued ‘guidance for a risk based approach for Legal Professionals on June 2019 for the implementation of FATF Recommendations, which can be downloaded from the website of FATF (see www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/fatfrecommendations/documents/rba-legal-professionals.html and FATF (2019), Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach for Legal Professionals, FATF, Paris, http://www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/documents/Guidance-RBA-legal-professionals.htmls, p.7

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid., 4

[9] Ibid., 5

[10] FATF (2012-2018), International Standards on Combatting Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation, FATF, Paris, France, www.fatf-gafi.org/recommendations.htm, p.4, 5

[11] Ibid.,18

[12] FATF (2012-2018), International Standards on Combatting Money Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism & Proliferation, FATF, Paris, France, www.fatf-gafi.org/recommendations.htm, p.83

See also: Working groups of the International Bar Association (“IBA”) (led by Stephen Revell), the American Bar Association (“ABA”) (led by Kevin Shepherd) and the Council of Bars and Law Socieites of Europe (“CCBE”) with the help of Dr. S.Chandra Mohan (Associate Professor of Law) and Lynn Kan (Juris Doctor), Singapore Management University, School of Law, “A Lawyer’s Guide to Detecting and Preventing Money Laundering”, October, 2014, p.6

[13] FATF (2019), Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach for Legal Professionals, FATF, Paris, www.fatf-gafi,org/publications/documents/Guidance-RBA-legal-professionals.html, p.7

[14] Ibid., 8

[15] Ibid., 10

[16] Ibid., 11

[17] Ibid., 18

[18] FATF (2019), Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach for Legal Professionals, FATF, Paris, www.fatf-gafi,org/publications/documents/Guidance-RBA-legal-professionals.html, p.13

[19] Ibid., 11

[20] Ibid., 12

[21] Letter No.7(6)/2020-D&L, Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Law and Justice dated 26^th, April, 2021 from Secretary to the Attorney General of Pakistan, Chairman, Pakistan Bar Council, Supreme Court Building, Islamabad.

[22] Draft of the Anti Money Laundering and Combatting Financing of Terrorism AML-CFT Regulations for lawyers and other independent legal professionals (DNFBPs), 2021 as annexed with Letter No.7(6)/2020-D&L, Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Law and Justice dated 26^th, April, 2021 from Secretary to the Attorney General of Pakistan, Chairman, Pakistan Bar Council, Supreme Court Building, Islamabad.

---

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of CourtingTheLaw.com or any other organization with which he might be associated.