Pakistan told to take tougher action on terror funding

Islamabad agreed to a 10-point action plan with FATF to be removed from the grey list. (REUTERS/photo)
Updated 16 August 2018
Follow

Pakistan told to take tougher action on terror funding

  • Asia Pacific Group and Pakistan will hold a second meeting in mid-September to monitor progress on watchdog’s action plan
  • Economists say Pakistan needs to improve its financial system and diplomacy to be removed from global “grey list”

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan has been warned it must strengthen efforts to curb money laundering and terrorism financing by a group monitoring the country’s commitments to the global Financial Action Task Force (FATF).

A six-member delegation from the task force’s Asia Pacific Group (APG) on Thursday highlighted shortcomings in Islamabad’s compliance with an action plan to plug loopholes in its financial system.

The delegation voiced its concerns at the end of a three-day visit to Pakistan and urged authorities to address a range of issues.

Pakistani authorities’ action against terrorism financing was limited to global terror outfits, including Al-Qaeda, Haqqani Network, the Taliban and Daesh, the delegation said.

However, Islamabad had yet to take effective steps to halt funding to groups proscribed by the UN Security Council, such as Jamaat-ud-Dawa, Falah-e-Insaniat, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad.

The delegation said authorities were pursuing a large number of terrorism cases, but only a few cases of terrorism financing. 

They also expressed concerns over the low conviction rate on charges of money laundering and terror financing.

Poor coordination among the provinces and the federal government was hindering implementation of the action plan, the delegation said.

FATF, the global financial watchdog, placed Pakistan on its “grey list” — a list of “jurisdictions with strategic deficiencies” — in June this year.

Islamabad agreed to a 10-point action plan with FATF to be removed from the grey list, or face a further downgrade in September next year.

“The APG delegation was basically an observatory mission and it was briefed by all relevant departments about Pakistan’s efforts to curb money laundering and terrorism financing,” Saeed Javed, the Ministry of Finance’s media director general, told Arab News on Thursday.

Representatives of APG and Pakistan will hold a second meeting in mid-September to examine progress on the action plan, he said.

A 27-member Pakistani task force comprising representatives of different government departments is working to identify and plug gaps in the financial system, Javed said.

“We are hoping to comply with all the requirements of FATF before September next year,” he said.

Dr. Athar Ahmed, a senior economist, described Pakistan’s listing on the grey list as a political move and said the incoming government of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) needs to improve its diplomacy to ensure removal from the list.

“The FATF and the international community have expressed concerns about funding of proscribed outfits and loopholes in our financial system,” he told Arab News. “The State Bank of Pakistan has been doing its best to improve the scrutiny of financial transactions and we hope this would be enough.”

Ahmed said that Pakistan would need at least three votes in the 37-member FATF to be removed from the grey list, so “the new government needs to improve diplomacy along with the efforts to curb money laundering and terrorism financing.”

Khawaja Khalid Farooq, former chief of the National Counter Terrorism Authority, said weaknesses in Pakistan’s investigation and prosecution of terror funding and money laundering needed to be addressed.

“Given the perception of Pakistan in the international community, it will never be easy for us to go off the grey list. We need to improve our financial system and diplomacy to avoid further degradation,” he told Arab News.


Tug of war: how US presidents battle Congress for military powers

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Tug of war: how US presidents battle Congress for military powers

  • The last official declaration of war by Congress was as far back as World War II

WASHINGTON, United States: Donald Trump’s unleashing of operation “Epic Fury” against Iran has once more underscored the long and bitter struggle between US presidents and Congress over who has the power to decide on foreign military action.
In his video address announcing “major combat” with the Islamic republic, Trump didn’t once mention any authorization or consultation with the US House of Representatives or Senate.
In doing so he sidelined not only Democrats, who called for an urgent war powers vote, but also his own Republican party as he asserts his dominance over a largely cowed legislature.
A US official said Secretary of State Marco Rubio had called top congressional leaders known as the “Gang of Eight” to give them a heads up on the Iran attack — adding that one was unreachable.
Rubio also “laid out the situation” and consulted with the same leaders on Tuesday in an hour-long briefing, the US official said.
According to the US Constitution, only Congress can declare war.
But at the same time the founding document of the United States first signed in 1787 says that the president is the “commander in chief” of the military, a definition that US leaders have in recent years taken very broadly.
The last official declaration of war by Congress was as far back as World War II.
There was no such proclamation during the unpopular Vietnam War, and it was then that Congress sought to reassert its powers.
In 1973 it adopted the War Powers Resolution, passed over Richard Nixon’s veto, to become the only lasting limit on unilateral presidential military action abroad.
The act allows the president to carry out a limited military intervention to respond to an urgent situation created by an attack against the United States.
In his video address on Saturday, Trump evoked an “imminent” threat to justify strikes against Iran.

- Sixty days -

Yet under this law, the president must still inform Congress within 48 hours.
It also says that if the president deploys US troops for a military action for more than 60 days, the head of state must then obtain the authorization of Congress for continued action.
That falls short of an official declaration of war.
The US Congress notably authorized the use of force in such a way after the September 11, 2011 attacks on the United States by Al-Qaeda. Presidents have used it over the past two decades for not only the 2001 invasion of Afghanistan but a series of operations in several countries linked to the “War on Terror.”
Trump is far from the first US president to launch military operations without going through Congress.
Democrat Bill Clinton launched US air strikes against Kosovo in 1999 as part of a NATO campaign, despite the lack of a green light from skeptical lawmakers.
Barack Obama did the same for airstrikes in Libya in 2011.
Trump followed their example in his first term in 2018 when he launched airstrikes in Syria along with Britain and France.
But since his return to power the 79-year-old has sought to push presidential power to its limits, and that includes in the military sphere.
Trump has ordered strikes on alleged drug trafficking boats in Latin America without consulting Congress, and in June 2025 struck Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Perhaps the most controversial act was when he ordered the capture of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro in a lightning military raid on January 3.
Republicans however managed to knock down moves by Democrats for a rare war powers resolution that would have curbed his authority over Venezuela operations.
Trump has meanwhile sought to extend his powers over the home front. Democrats have slammed the Republican for deploying the National Guard in several US cities in what he calls a crackdown on crime and immigration.