Saudi Shoura Council Approves Draft Amended Anti-Money Laundering Law
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.01.12
In response to recommendations made in a 2010 Middle East and North Africa Financial Action Task Force Report on Saudi Arabia's anti-money laundering (AML) and counter-terrorist financing (CFT) regime (the Report), Saudi Arabia's Shoura Council approved on 27 February 2012 a draft amended anti-money laundering law (the Draft Law).
Saudi Arabia's existing AML / CFT regime was established in 2003 with the issuance of the Anti Money Laundering Act (AMLA) and supplemented by implementing regulations issued in 2007. The Report identified a number of areas for improvement in Saudi Arabia's existing AML / CFT regime, including:
- The AMLA does not clearly cover self-laundering and does not clearly extend to predicate offences committed abroad.
- There is no stand-alone statutory terrorist financing (TF) offence with features and elements as required by the United Nations' Terrorist Financing Convention (the UN TF Convention).
- TF as a money laundering offence does not extend to all legal entities or to all funds as required by the UN TF Convention.
- TF as a money laundering offence does not cover acts by terrorist organizations of fewer than three persons, nor does it cover attempted TF.
- While the AMLA contains specific provisions for confiscation in AML / CFT proceedings, protection of bona fide third parties is insufficient.
The Draft Law, which has not been released to the public, will reportedly seek to address some of the more urgent concerns raised by the Report.
Insights
Client Alert | 1 min read | 08.10.26
In Appeal of Bahadir (a C&M case), the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals denied the government’s motion to dismiss in its entirety, ruling in favor of the contractor on both key issues raised by the government. The case arises from a contract for construction work at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, under which Appellant alleged government-caused delay and filed certified prolongation claims using a “windows analysis” methodology. The government moved to dismiss, arguing that Appellant failed to state a sum certain for each of what the government characterized as 38 distinct claims, and separately that four claims had not been properly presented to the Contracting Officer.
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.10.26
Client Alert | 4 min read | 08.07.26
Missouri AG Sues Kansas City Over Race- and Sex-Based Contracting Program
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.06.26
