Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-04-Speech-3-284"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010404.11.3-284"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, Mr Lehne's proposal for a directive is genuinely relevant and well-structured, but I would like attention to be paid to three points of the directive: the extension of the definition of alleged money laundering offences, remote identification of clients and the confidentiality of information received.
With regard to the first point, the joint document puts forward a text that defines organised crime, including in the definition of alleged money laundering offences those related to organised crime. I fully support this extension. However, I cannot support the further extension to other offences – fraud and corruption, at least serious – as the existence of seriousness is made clear insofar as these offences affect the financial interests of the European Union, if, therefore, they are
. The reference to ascertaining the seriousness of the offence is, indeed, not very clear.
Secondly: the text proposes, once again, a procedure for the remote identification of clients, now that the provisions introducing a complex procedure which is difficult to implement have been appropriately removed from the text of the previous common position. The new wording appears exaggerated, while the issue of standards to be related to the different practices in use should be the responsibility of the individual countries. On this point, the concern is that specific, binding European standards might be issued, requiring the application of rigid procedures which are difficult to implement.
Thirdly: the confidentiality of information received. All too often, the information provided on suspect operations is not treated as sufficiently confidential, which is clearly dangerous for the person who has provided it. Therefore, stringent confidentiality rules on information on suspect operations need to be issued. In this connection, excessive passing on of data for information purposes, for example, in banks to intermediary bodies, or in the professional categories to auditors, is eliminated."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"covered by the provisions of Article 1(e) of the Second Protocol to the Convention on the protection of the European Communities' financial interests"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples