Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

STATEMENT OF
JEFFREY GLEKEL AND
LAWRENCE B. PEDOWITZ

on behalf of the

ASSOCIATION OF THE BAR
OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK

concerning

MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION

before the

SUBCOMMITTEE ON FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
SUPERVISION, REGULATION AND INSURANCE
OF THE

COMMITTEE ON BANKING, FINANCE AND URBAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

May 14, 1986

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee.

I am Chair of the Committee on Federal Legislation of the Association of the Bar of the City of New York. With me is Lawrence B. Pedowitz, a member of the Committee who is the principal author of the Report which the Association has issued concerning money laundering legislation. The Association consists of approximately 15,000 attorneys, most of whom practice in the New York City area.

We appreciate this opportunity to present the Association's views concerning the important but difficult subject of money laundering. Our Report, entitled Money Laundering: An Analysis of Legislative Proposals, represents the culmination of an extensive and exhaustive examination of the issues posed by money laundering legislation. Since we are unable to include all of our analysis and recommendation in our statement, we respectfully request that the full Report be included in the Subcommittee's record. Of course the views contained in our Report are those of the individual members of the Committee on Federal Legislation and not those of their professional affiliations or clients. Nevertheless, it is relevant to note that the Committee's members

brought to their consideration of this problem diverse professional backgrounds and experience. We include government attorneys, former prosecutors, staff member of the American Civil Liberties Union, law professors, and banking lawyers. Despite these different perspectives from which we approached this issue, we

arrived at a broad consensus concerning where the

balance should be struck between legitimate law enforcement concerns and other important societal interests.

Summary of Conclusions

Money laundering is a growing national problem. Its existence contributes significantly to the vitality and profits of organized crime in the United States, especially to narcotics trafficking. We believe that this Subcommittee is rightly focusing upon money laundering's pervasiveness and its ill effects. also agree with the Administration and others who believe that new legislation is needed to combat money laundering.

We

We are concerned, however, that any legislation enacted in response to significant law enforcement interests be narrowly tailored so as not to encroach

unnecessarily on other societal interests, such as the protection of individual rights of privacy.

In our view, most of the pending legislative

proposals, and in particular H.R. 2785, are overbroad in a number of important respects and cannot be sufficiently justified by law enforcement concerns. We believe that if, after enactment of narrower legislation, experience dictates the need for more expansive legislation, amendments can be proposed.

We principally urge, in summary, that federal legislation in this area should be subject to a number of key restraints. First, we recommend that a federal offense of money laundering be limited to those instances in which the money laundering: (i) is undertaken "knowingly"; (ii) utilizes a bank or other "financial institution"; and (iii) involves the cash proceeds of federal offenses that qualify as "racketeering activity" under the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations ("RICO") statute. Second, although we agree that there is some need to liberalize the disclosure provisions of the RFPA, we do not believe there is any justification for permitting voluntary disclosure by financial institutions of customer financial records beyond certain derivative information. We recommend

that voluntary disclosure be strictly limited to identifying information concerning the customer and account involved in, and the nature or specifics of, the suspected illegal activity. Third, we recommend against creating a receipt of criminal proceeds offense which would criminalize on a federal level conduct of a much broader scope than we believe desirable.

A. Money Laundering Statute

The need for a money laundering statute seems plain. As the Commission Report makes evident, nothing short of new legislation will "strike directly at the

activities in which money launderers engage."l Money
launderers who comply with the recordkeeping and report-
ing requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act ("BSA") by
completing CTRs and other required forms "can operate
with virtual impunity, unless and until it can be
proved that the launderer has violated another Federal
statute."
Moreover, bank officials and employees who
know that money laundering is occurring, but nonetheless
continue to file the requisite BSA forms, also may

1

President's Commission on Organized Crime, The

Cash Connection: Organized Crime, Financial Institutions, and Money Laundering 61 (Interim Report to the President and the Attorney General, October 1984) [hereinafter "Commisson Report"]

[blocks in formation]
« iepriekšējāTurpināt »