Jerusalem Summit
Arrow Presidium
Arrow JS Europe III (Rome)
Arrow JS Asia V (Jerusalem)
Arrow JS Europe II (Berlin)
Arrow JS Asia IV (Tokyo)
Arrow JS Europe I London
Arrow JS Asia III (Singapore)
Arrow JS Africa
Arrow JS 2004
Arrow JS 2003
Arrow JS Asia II (Seoul)
Arrow JS Asia I (Manila)
Arrow Newsletters
Arrow Seminars
Arrow Get Involved
Arrow Letters and Comments
Arrow Contact Us

Arrow SIAH - Public Diplomacy Course
Arrow On One Foot

Terror Financing: Myth and Reality
by Rachel Ehrenfeld

Latin America

The abovementioned UN Convention and resolutions likewise apply in the Latin-American context, but area-specific organizations such as the Organization of American States (OAS) also bring their own antiterrorism provisions to the table. Founded in 1948, the OAS includes all 35 independent countries of the Americas, with Cuba alone denied participation since 1962. OAS features a specialized committee against terrorism, called the Comite Interamericano contra el terrorismo (CICTE), which was created following two conferences, Lima in 1996 and Mar del Plata in 1998.
CICTE “has taken a lead in developing concrete strategies for confronting the threat of terrorism. In its annual meetings, it has recommended that countries enact a range of measures to strengthen border security, tighten customs controls, and improve the quality of identification and travel documents. Other recommendations included financial controls to prevent money laundering and the financing of terrorist activities.”
Partially in response to the September 11 attacks, OAS created The Inter-American Convention against Terrorism. The treaty, produced after the September 11 attacks, “seeks to prevent the financing of terrorist activities, strengthen border controls and increase cooperation among law enforcement authorities in different countries, among other measures. It calls terrorism “a serious threat to democratic values and to international peace and security.” It entered into force on July 10, 2003, and has been ratified by eight countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Canada, El Salvador, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Peru and Venezuela.
Article 4 of the Treaty outlines measures intended to prevent, combat, and eradicate the financing of terrorism. Section 1 calls on state parties to institute a legal and regulatory regime to prevent, combat, and eradicate the financing of terrorism which includes “a comprehensive domestic regulatory and supervisory regime for banks, other financial institutions, and other entities deemed particularly susceptible to being used for the financing of terrorist activities,” which shall emphasize requirements for customer identification, record-keeping, and the reporting of suspicious or unusual transactions. The regime must also include “measures to detect and monitor movements across borders of cash, bearer negotiable instruments, and other appropriate movements of value,” subject to safeguards that do not impede the movement of legitimate capital. Finally, there is a provision for “measures to ensure that the competent authorities…have the ability to cooperate and exchange information at the national and international levels within the conditions prescribed under its domestic law. To that end, each state party shall establish and maintain a financial intelligence unit to serve as a national center for the collection, analysis, and dissemination of pertinent money laundering and terrorist financing information” and inform the OAS Secretary General of these designated units. Section 2 of Article 4 mandates that state parties follow the recommendations “developed by specialized international and regional entities, in particular the Financial Action Task Force and, as appropriate, the Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission, the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force, and the South American Financial Action Task Force.”
Article 5 covers the seizure and confiscation of terrorist assets. It mandates that each state party take necessary measures to identify, freeze or confiscate for the purposes of possible forfeiture “any funds or other assets constituting the proceeds of, used to facilitate, or used or intended to finance, the commission of any” terrorist offenses, both within and outside the jurisdiction of the state party. Article 6 calls on each state party to ensure that its domestic money laundering legislation also includes those offenses established in the Convention.
Meanwhile, the IMF and World Bank collaborated to introduce Financial Sector Assessment Programs (FSAP) intended to facilitate efforts to promote the soundness of financial systems in member countries. As part of the report, FSAP assess the country’s framework to combat money laundering and terrorism. Available reports for countries investigated can be found at The IMF and the World Bank prepare Reports on the Observance of Standards and Codes (ROSCs), which summarize the extent to which countries observe certain internationally recognized standards and codes, and are published at the request of the member country. These may be found at
Back in 1990, the OECD’s Financial Action Task Force (FATF) on Money Laundering established 40 proposals against money laundering.56 These were revised in 1996 and in 2003. After September 11, FATF amplified its 40 recommendations with eight specific recommendations against terrorist financing. These commit member states to 1) take immediate steps to ratify and implement the relevant United Nations instruments; 2) criminalize the financing of terrorism, terrorist acts and terrorist organizations; 3) freeze and confiscate terrorist assets; 4) report suspicious transactions linked to terrorism; 5) provide the widest possible range of assistance to other countries’ law enforcement and regulatory authorities for terrorist financing investigations; 6) impose anti-money laundering requirements on alternative remittance systems; 7) strengthen customer identification measures in international and domestic wire transfers; and 8) ensure that entities, in particular non-profit organizations, cannot be misused to finance terrorism. Of the Latin American states, however, only Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico belong to FATF, and until recently Guatemala was actually listed as a non-cooperative country.
The following section covers anti- terror financing laws Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay. These Latin American countries have been dealing with terrorism for years, and most already have counter-terrorism legislation in their Penal Code. In addition, several countries have statues to prevent and stop money laundering activities. Finally, only a few of the countries investigated have laws that deal specifically with the financing of terrorist activities. Nevertheless, it should be noted that all countries investigated are part of the international efforts to stop terrorism and the financing of terrorist activities.

Tri-Border Region: Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay

The area where the 3 countries meet has been described as the regional center for the funding of Hizballah and Hamas. This lawless area is also used for arms trafficking, money laundering, and smuggling. There have also been unconfirmed reports of an Al-Qaeda presence in the area.57 To address the problem, the three countries and the US recently established “Grupo 3+1,” which serves as a regional framework for discussion and problem solving. On December 3, 2003, the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and the United States met in the city of Asuncion in the framework of the 3+1 Group on Tri-Border Area Security to discuss and analyze preventive actions against terrorism. The discussions covered terrorist training, the strengthening of financial institutions, money-laundering legislation, the financing of terrorism, drug and arms trafficking, border controls, as well as cooperation on the exchange of information and law enforcement on this matter.58

Argentina does not have legislation to deal specifically with the crime of financing of terrorism, and its regulations regarding support of terrorism and criminal association insufficiently cover the area of terrorist financing.59 According to the State Department’s “Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2003” report, Argentina lacks new anti-terrorism legislation despite its oft-stated commitment to the fight against terrorism.60
Argentina’s Article 210b covers crimes by unlawful association, mandating a prison term of 5-20 years to individuals that take part in, cooperate, or help to form and maintain an illicit group that endangers the National Constitution. It is essentially an anti-conspiracy law which goes into effect if at least two of the following conditions are met: a) the group is composed of ten or more members; b) it is organized in a military manner; c) it is composed of cells; d) it has military weapons or powerful offensive explosives; e) it operates in more than one political jurisdiction; f) it is composed by one or more military or security officials; g) it has connections with similar domestic or foreign organizations; or h) it receives aid or direction from public officials. Its anti-money laundering legislation includes Drug Law no. 23.737 (1989) and its Bill on Money Laundering, Law 25.246 (2000), which creates the Financial Information Unit (FIU).
Argentina has yet to bring to justice former President Carlos Menem and his associates for facilitating Hizbollah’s activities and bombings of the Buenos Aires Jewish Center and the Jewish Embassy in 1992 and 1994, respectively.


Brazil is a member of the Financial Action Task Force and has extensive legislation criminalizing terrorist offences.61 The main legal texts regarding terrorism are the Penal Code, The Code of Criminal Procedure, the National Security Act, the Heinous Crimes Act, the Act for the Oversight of the Export of Services and Items for Military Use, Dual-Use and Use in the Nuclear, Chemical or Biological Fields, the Money Laundering Act, and the Act establishing the Brazilian Intelligence System (SISBIN).
Law No. 9.613 of March 3, 1998 first defined and criminalized money laundering, laid out the principal preventative measures and established the Financial Intelligence Unit.62 This unit, known as the Financial Activities Control Council (COAF), oversees financial and non-financial entities that fall outside of the jurisdiction of the major supervisory authorities.63
Brazilian law prohibits money-laundering, or converting the proceeds of a crime into licit assets, and punishes it with three to ten years in prison, along with confiscation of the funds involved.64 Knowingly using the proceeds of crime in a group set up to commit terrorism is punishable by 30 years in prison. Supporting a terrorist organization or committing criminal acts to fund such a group also constitutes the crime of financing terrorism. In Brazil, narcotics trafficking is considered to be the single largest generator of criminal proceeds, followed by firearms, contraband and illegal gambling. An individual found guilty of money laundering automatically surrenders any assets generated by the predicate offence to the government; this includes proceeds obtained from or for terrorist groups as well as the funds of individual terrorists.
The secrecy provisions of Brazilian banking law once posed a significant obstacle to the system’s effectiveness, as they prevented the COAF from accessing some portions of reports or from providing them to a foreign jurisdiction. However, the government passed a complimentary act for the lifting of bank secrecy rules in the course of criminal investigations, especially ones having to do with terrorism. The Code of Criminal Procedure and international agreements govern instances in which seizure of assets requires two countries to recognize the crime. Brazil participates in the MERCOSUR working group on terrorism. It is party to the Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism and the United Nations Security Council resolution 1373 (2001). However, despite its sound foundation, the relatively-new Brazilian anti-money laundering system has not yet resulted in any successful prosecutions or convictions, and if Brazil’s past implementation of laws is any guide, it is unlikely that any headway in fighting terror financing is to be made.


Paraguay recognizes that it lacks effective counter-terrorism legislation, and acknowledges the possible laundering of funds used towards terrorist causes. It has asked other governments for assistance as the shortcomings of its own national legal system leave it incapable of prosecuting suspected terrorists.65 Despite these shortcomings and a low rating on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index 2003, it has sent to trial Hezbollah fundraisers. Two of these — Sobhi Fayad and Ali Nizar Dahroug — were sentenced, albeit under laws that covered crimes of tax evasion rather than terrorist financing.66 Fund collector Assad Ahmad Barakat, who was accused of terrorist financing by the US Department of Treasury, was likewise extradited from Brazil to Paraguay in 2003 for tax evasion.67


Uruguay is party to eight of the 12 international conventions and protocols relating to terrorism. “Although Uruguay does not have the financial or military resources to play a direct role in the war on terrorism, it provides troops to international peacekeeping missions in Africa and the Middle East. In 2002, Uruguayan law-enforcement authorities assisted with international investigations to monitor the movements and activities of suspected terrorists, and the Parliament is currently drafting new terrorism laws that will further facilitate domestic and international counterterrorism efforts. The Uruguayan Government readily cooperates with US Government requests to investigate individuals or financial transactions linked to terrorism.”
Cooperation has not been flawless, however. Egypt has asked Uruguay to extradite suspected al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group) terrorist al-Said Hassan Mokhles, wanted in connection with the 1997 attack on tourists in Luxor, Egypt. He has been held in Uruguay since early 1999 on charges of document fraud, but Uruguay and Egypt have been unable to agree on the terms for extradition, in part because Egypt has not guaranteed in writing that Mokhles will not be subject to the death penalty.”68


While Colombia has no specific laws regarding terrorism financing, some of the laws in the area of money laundering are applicable.69 New measures in the Colombia Penal Code raised the rank of a crime of willfully providing funds for terrorist acts or to engage in terrorist activities. Although Colombian legislation contains no specific procedure for ‘freezing’ funds or financial assets of persons or entities suspected of supporting terrorist activities, any assets linked to criminal activities, including terrorism, are subject to confiscation by order of the Prosecutor-General in the context of a criminal procedure, as provided in article 67 of the new Code of Criminal Procedure.70
Article 343 of the Penal Code defines terrorism and establishes a penalty of 10-15 years plus fine. Article 345 stipulates a penalty of 6-12 years for those who administer money or goods related to terrorist activities.71 Furthermore, the Penal Code’s chapter on money laundering mandates the reporting of any suspicious transaction. Accordingly, “any employee or director of a financial institution or savings and loan cooperative who, with a view to concealing or disguising the illicit origin of the money, fails to comply with the control mechanisms established by the legal system with respect to cash transactions, shall be liable to a term of imprisonment.” Both Decree No. 663 of the Financial Institutions Statute and Act No. 190 of the Anti-Corruption Statute require the reporting of irregularities. Moreover, Article 53 of the Organic Statute of the Financial System (EOSF) expressly prohibits the operation of informal banks in Colombian territory. The Superintendent of Banks is likewise charged with ensuring that no one undertakes informal or irregular banking activity in Colombia, and is empowered to conduct inspection visits to suspect locations as well as to adopt necessary preventive measures.
The Financial Analysis Unit of the Ministry of Finance concludes agreements with financial tracking bodies in other countries to exchange information used in carrying out initial checks, with particular reference to recent international measures to combat Colombian terrorist groups.72


There are no specific laws covering the financing of terror activities in Chile, although terrorist acts are defined in the Penal Code and their prosecution is provided for.73 In 2003, Chile approved a Financial Intelligence Unit “with the goal of preventing the use of the financial system and economic sectors for criminal acts as named by the law” but subsequent rulings of the Constitutional Court eliminated the FIU’s sanctioning powers, limited its discretion in requesting date on suspicious transaction records and denied its access to information protected by bank secrecy, thus hindering investigations and the disclosure of potential offences. Likewise, securities firms, insurance companies and foreign exchange retail operators also fall short in monitoring compliance.
Also noteworthy is Iquique, a port city and free trade zone in Chile, which the Bush Administration has designated as a terrorist hot spot. There have been ties between Iquique, Hizbollah and the Tri-border region, and investigators are focusing on individuals of Pakistani origin running businesses in Iquique that could have links with Islamic groups operating on the Pakistani-Afghan border.

The financing of terrorism is not characterized as an individual offence under Mexico penal law, but various penal characterizations and provisions may be applied in order to prosecute and punish specific types of conduct considered to constitute the financing of terrorist acts.74 Mexico’s geographic situation and extensive financial sector means that drug smuggling, financial crime, organized crime and trafficking in arms and human beings all contribute to the accumulation of illegal assets. The anti-money laundering law of 1990 was reinforced by the government in 1997, and progressive improvements have eliminated remaining loopholes, defined requirements and generally added to the system’s effectiveness. The Mexican Bankers Association has put in place a comprehensive training program, and the National Banking and Securities Commission (CNBV) has created examiners manuals that cover money laundering, in addition to the CNBC’s annual on-site supervision of institutional money-laundering controls and policies.
Article 400b of the Penal Code broadly covers money laundering offences and gives a court the discretion to reverse burden of proof regarding the origin of the property given sufficient proof by the prosecution. Few convictions have been attained under this law, however, and many cases remain stuck in court or under investigation. Mexico is about to complete the procedures to become a party to the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. It is also studying the legislative reforms that will be required in order to make the financing of terrorism an autonomous offence. Mexico is also working actively with global initiatives, especially with the Financial Action Task Force on Money-Laundering (FATF), of which it is a full member, to implement international policies against the financing of terrorist organizations.
Mexico has already met or exceeded most of the FATF minimum requirements for preventive measures in the financial sector. The key operational bodies in the anti-money laundering system are the Attached General Directorate for Transaction Investigations (DGAIO) of the Secretariat of Finance and Public Credit and the money laundering unit of the General Attorney’s Office (PGR). These well-resourced units have been very active in introducing and promoting money laundering legislation, and serve a central coordination and cooperation function. However, bank secrecy laws impede the direct and timely transmission of reports to the DGAIO and of criminal investigation requests to financial institutions. The elimination of burdensome intermediary steps would result in reports being transmitted more quickly.
To date, there have been no reports on the freezing of terrorist assets in Mexico.


Panama, the center for all sorts of money-laundering in Central America, is a good example of how lip service can be paid to the war on terrorism by passing all the appropriate laws. It not only has a special law, which Law 50 added with a special chapter on terrorism (VI) to Title VII of the Second Book of the Penal Code, it also has laws to prohibit terror financing. Chapter VI defines terrorism as “belonging to an unlawful organization whose goal it is to alter constitutional order and public safety”, and punishes it with 15-20 years imprisonment. Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), established by Presidential Directive No. 163 in 2000. It has also signed and ratified most international conventions and treaties on money laundering, including the 40 + 8 FATF recommendations. It has also passed two extensive pieces of domestic legislation, Law #48 (2003) and article 3 of Law 50 (2003), to improve oversight of financial institutions and boost control of financial transactions and operations. Article 264-B goes on to say that those who intentionally finance, fund, hide or transfer money or goods to be used in any of the terrorist acts mentioned before likewise receive 15-20 years in jail.

Peru’s long struggle with the Sendero Luminoso has provided for anti-terrorism legislation. Decree Law No. 25475 of May 199275 punishes the crime of terrorism and Article 2 defines a terrorist as “anyone who carries out acts against the life, physical integrity, health, freedom or security of individuals or against property…or affects the international relations or safety or society or the State.” Article 4 of the Decree criminalizes collaboration with terrorists, including securing, collecting or supplying any goods or means or aid to further the goals of a terrorist group. Under this Decree Law, providing economic assistance “for the purpose of financing the activities of terrorist elements or groups shall be punished by a term of imprisonment of not less than 20 years.” Laundering of funds from narco-terrorism is also penalized under Article 296-B of the Peruvian Penal Code by life imprisonment. Since 2001, “new laws have been enacted to permit more effective investigation into cases of corruption.” These laws may also be used to investigate terrorist actions. Procedural Act No. 27379 provides for special restrictions on individual rights during preliminary investigations. This includes the freezing of assets and the lifting of bank secrecy and tax confidentiality. Supreme Decree No. 084-2001-RE of 2001 ratifies the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism. Like many other Latin American states, Peru has also created a Financial Intelligence Unit under Law No. 27.693 (2002).


Despite the laws on the books of European and Latin American states, cases pertaining to terror financing are rarely brought to court. To Kantor, this trend suggests that “absent a dramatically different approach, efforts at interdicting flows of terror money could prove even less successful than efforts at interdicting flows of drug money. The sums involved in terrorist operations and terrorist capital expenditures are far smaller than the many billions of dollars spent each year as part of the illegal drug trade.”76 Thus, to make the war on terror count, signatories to the abovementioned national and international legislation must aggressively check all terror-sponsoring regimes, including Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran and the Palestinian Authority, the same way as the US did the Taliban in Afghanistan.
For its part, the US should try to persuade international financial organizations to withhold financial aid from terror-supporting countries, and to sanction such states as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Indonesia, Sudan, Libya and North Korea. For too long, America’s non-confrontational approach towards “friendly” regimes such as the House of Saud has undermined the safety of its citizens in return for political expediency.77
Yet even when America is proactive, European states impede transatlantic cooperation on combating terror financing. They argue that new anti-money laundering laws aimed at broadening the US government’s power over the assets of foreign individuals, businesses and financial institutions fall outside the provisions of mutual legal assistance treaties signed between Washington and most European countries. But as Schmahl has argued, “in times of globalization and transnational operation, terrorism can no longer be dealt with solely by means of isolated action but has to be addressed in addition through the cooperation of all States even in criminal prosecution matters.” Across Justice and Home Affairs (aka. the “third pillar”), if not across the Atlantic, the new terrorist threat has been a strong impetus for legal cooperation and integration.78 In addition, unilateral U.S. action is bound to be ineffective if alternative financial centers are able to operate outside the reach of U.S. controls.79
Heraldo Muñoz’s UN Security Council Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team recently found that changing Al-Qaeda terrorist methodology called for new anti-financing measures. Its August 2004 report stated that “while the sanctions against the financing of terrorism have had some effect, and some millions of dollars in assets have been frozen, there is scope to update them based on how al-Qaeda now raises and transfers its money.” While national and international action is said to have decreased Al-Qaeda’s funding, its need for money may have also decreased. The number of people in camps under its control is now much smaller, and it no longer has to pay $10-20 million annually to its Taliban hosts. But Al-Qaeda’s growing popularity has probably increased the flow of money to the organization and its surrogates, thus its need to move new funds around. This growing popularity means that more new sources and new methods are utilized to channel the money, and therefore new regulations are needed to better trace the movement of the funds. Measures to curb the abuse of hawala, cash couriers, and Islamic charities could further slow the movement of terrorist moneys. Reports submitted by UN Member States under resolution 1455 show that a legal basis for freezing Al-Qaeda and related terrorist assets now exists in all but three Member States.
However, the UN Security Council Monitoring Team found the reporting culture of some Member States partially to blame for the poor, nonspecific quality of their reports, and more importantly for their failure to act. States often found it easier to report what had been done politically rather than at the operational level. This prompted the Monitoring Team to suggest a half-baked solution—voluntary visits to those states most at risk from Al-Qaeda infiltration. But since these visits have to be agreed upon by the states in question, the element of surprise and discovery is greatly diminished.
While legislation establishing a legal framework for terror financing countermeasures is a basic prerequisite, it accomplishes little without proper enforcement. Instead, a pervasive lack of cooperation, objectivity and political will allows those who finance terrorism to remain beyond the pale of the law.

Special thanks to Alex Angert, and to Edith Tsouri for the help with the research

About the Author

Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld’s latest book is Funding Evil; How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It (Bonus Books, 2003, 2004) Her previous book are: Evil Money, Encounters Along the Money Trail (HarperCollins in 1992, SPI, 1994), and Narco-Terrorism; How Governments around the World used the Drug Trade to Finance and Further Terrorist Activities (Basic Books, 1990&1992). She is the director of the New York–based American Center for Democracy, and the Center for the Study of Corruption & the Rule of Law. Dr. Ehrenfeld is a sought-after commentator and consultant and expert witness on of terror financing, international terrorism, political corruption, money laundering, drug trafficking, and organized crime and the connections that binds these groups together.
Dr. Ehrenfeld has lectured on these issues, has advised banking communities, law enforcement agencies, and governments in many countries. Most recently, she consulted for the U.S. Defense Department’s Threat Reduction Agency, and testified in court and before a Grand –Jury in terror financing cases; before the European Parliament on how the Palestinian Authority uses aid money to fund its terror activities, and provided evidence to the UK Parliament on the corruption of the PA. Dr. Ehrenfeld is Board member of the Committee on the Present Danger.
Dr. Ehrenfeld’s articles appear in the Wall Street Journal, The Washington Times, the National Review, the Euobserver, The Jerusalem Post, and The NY SUN. She frequently appears as an expert commentator on television news programs, including The O’Reilly Factor, Fox News, CNN, ABC, NBC, and MSNBC. She addressed the Nixon Center, The Heritage Foundation, The Hudson Institute; The Middle East Forum; The Committee on Foreign Relations; The Commentator’s Circle (London, UK), The Jerusalem Summit, the Singapore International Conference on National Security, and many other national and international events.
Dr. Ehrenfeld worked as a research scholar at New York University School of Law, a visiting scholar at the Columbia University Institute of War and Peace Studies, and as a fellow at Johns Hopkins’s SAIS. Her Ph.D in Criminology is from the Hebrew University School of Law.

Tel: 212-399-4246; Fax: 212-399-4244;
e mail:;


1. “Grassley and Baucus Call for ‘Fundamental Reform’ Within War on Terror Financing.” US Senate Committee of Finance. March 29, 2004., 1.
2. Stuart A. Levey. Under Secretary, Terrorism and Financial Intelligence U.S. Department of the Treasury. Testimony before the Senate Committee on Banking, and Urban Affairs. September 29, 2004.
3. Ibid.
4. “Three Years of Progress in the War on Terror.” The White House. October 22, 2004.
5. Kantor, Mark. “Effective Enforcement of International Obligations to Suppress the Financing of Terror.” The American Society of International Law. Task Force on Terrorism. September 2002., p. 2.
6. Schmahl, Stefanie. ‘Specific Methods of Prosecuting Terrorists in National Law.’ Presented at the Max Planck Society Conference entitled “Terrorism as a Challenge for National and International Law.”, p. 12-3.
7. S/RES/1526 (2004).
8. Schmahl, p. 3.
9. Schmahl, p. 14.
10. S/RES/1373 (2001).
11. Kantor, p. 6.
12. The projects can be found at
13. Schmahl, p. 16.
14. “Anti-Terrorist Finance Group Reauthorized for Eight Years.” Embassy of Japan. May 14, 2004.
15. Matthew Levitt. “Terror on the UN Payroll?” Peacewatch. No. 475. October 13, 2004.
16. “Israel Arrests 13 UN Employees.” UPI. October 5, 2004.
17. Michael Freund. “Canada Refuses to Cut UNRWA Funding.” Arutz-7 Israel National News. October 25, 2004.
18. Matthew Levitt. “Terror on the UN Payroll?” Peacewatch. No. 475. October 13, 2004.
19. The Terrorism Act (2000):
20. The Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (2001):
21. The Supreme Court of the Judicature, Court of Appeal (Civil Division), On Appeal from the High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division (Mr. Justice Gray), HQ03X01813 and HQ03X01775. Citation Number [2004] EWCA (Civ) 983. May 11, 2004. Jameel and Another vs. Times Newspapers Limited.
22. Michael Mcdonough. “England Orders Terror Group Assets Frozen.” Lancaster Online. October 14, 2004.
23. European Council Regulation 2580/2001. December 27, 2001.
24. A full listing of EU anti-terror legislation is available at CELEX address:
25. HAMAS relies for its funding on Saudi Arabia.
26. “Managing European Taxpayer’s Money: Supporting the Palestinian Arabs – A Study in Transparency.” Funding for Peace Coalition. August 2004. FPC_Report_on_EU_Funding_of_Palestinian_Terror3_Corruption(pdf).asp
27. “Managing European Taxpayer’s Money: Supporting the Palestinian Arabs – A Study in Transparency.” Funding for Peace Coalition. August 2004. FPC_Report_on_EU_Funding_of_Palestinian_Terror3_Corruption(pdf).asp, p. 6.
28. and Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, as interviewed by the Funding for Peace Coalition.
29. Written Question E-2033/04 by Theresa Villiers (PPE-DE) to the Commission and E-2033/04EN Answer given by Mr. Patten on behalf of the Commission. October 20, 2004.
30. Issam Abu Issa, former chairman of the Palestine International Bank. “Arafat’s Swiss Bank Account.” Middle East Forum.
31. “Syria-EU Association Agreement-Signing.” SANA: Official Syrian News Agency. October 19, 2004.
32. Adopted by the Council on March 6, 2002.
33. Adopted by the Council on May 27, 2002.
34. “International Narcotics Control Strategy Report: Germany.” Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. March 2004.
35. Section 129a: Formation of Terrorist Organizations.
36. Directive 2001/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 December 2001.
37. Gesetz zur Bekämpfung des international terrorsimus. (Combating Terrorism) Law of 9 Jan 2002 in Bundesgesetzblatt I pg. 361, in force 1 Jan 2002; and Law of 22 Aug 2002 in Bundesgesetzblatt I pg. 3,390, which amends the Criminal Code regarding foreign criminal and terrorist organizations and enables confiscation of property.
38. “International Narcotics Control Strategy Report: Germany.” Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. March 2004.
39. “Specter Calls for Criminal Prosecution of Financial Contributors to HAMAS.” August 6, 2002.
40. “Countering Terrorist Financing an International Concern.” German Embassy, Washington D.C. May 26, 2004.
41. “Measures taken by the German government to fight international terrorism.” The Federal Government of Germany. October 27, 2004.,10001.623975/Measures-taken-by-the-German-g.htm
42. “International Narcotics Control Strategy Report: Germany.” Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. March 2004.
43. “Loi n° 96-647 du 22 juillet 1996 art. 1 Journal Officiel du 23 juillet 1996” and “Loi n° 98-467 du 17 juin 1998 art. 84 Journal Officiel du 18 juin 1998” at The Code of Criminal Procedure, sections 706-16–706-25-1, is likewise at
44. Loi 647 of 22 Jul 1996 (prevention of terrorism, amending the Criminal Code, Code of Criminal Procedure and Civil Code) in Journal officiel pg. 11,104. This act is embodied in the texts of the various codes, e.g., Criminal Code, sections 421-1–422-5.
45. Charles Duelfer. “Comprehensive Report of the Special Advisor to the DCI on Iraq’s WMD.” October 6, 2004.
46. “Riforma della legislazione nazionale del turismo.” L. 135/01. Parlamento Italiano. March 29, 2001.
47. “Conversione in legge, con modificazioni, del decreto-legge 12 ottobre 2001, n. 369, recante misure urgenti per reprimere e contrastare il finanziamento del terrorismo internazionale.” L. 431/01. Parlamento Italiano. December 14, 2001.
48. See
50. “Fact Sheet: Designation of Ten Individuals Tied to an al Qaeda Cell in Italy.” U.S. Treasury Office of Public Affairs. March 18, 2004.
51. “U.S. Designates Additional Members of Italian Al Qaeda Cell.” Department of the Treasury. June 24, 2004.
52. Dale Fuchs. “Spaniard Says Drugs Financed Train Bombings.” International Herald Tribune. April 15, 2004.
53. Federal law 130-FZ of July 25, 1998 can be found at Federal law 103-FZ of July 24, 2002, Federal law 112-FZ of July 25, 2003 and Federal law 114-FZ of July 25, 2002 can be found in SZRF 2002 no. 30, item 3,028, at
54. Jill Dougherty. “Chechen ‘claims Beslan attack’.” September 17, 2004.
55. “Ideofact.” September 26, 2004.
56. See
57. “Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2003.” U.S. State Department.
58. “Communiqué of 3+1 Group, December 2003.” Inter-American Committee Against Terrorism. According to the GAFI(FATF) report in lavadodedinero.com60. “Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2003.” U.S. State Department.
61. A partial list of legislation concerning the suppression of terrorism financing, money laundering, and freezing assets includes Complementary Act 105 of January 2001, Articles 1, 9; the Code of Criminal Procedure, Decree-Law 3689 of October 1941, Articles 125-144, sections VI, VII; the Constitution of Brazil, Articles 5, 173, 225; the National Security Act, Act 7170 of December 1983, Articles 20, 24; the Penal Code, Article 91; Decrees No. 3267, 3755, 3976, and 4150; Articles 21 and 26 of the Civil Code; Article 66 of Act No. 10406 of the New Civil Code; Act 9532/97, Articles 12, 15; and Act 9790/99, Article 4.
62. Act 9.613 of March 3, 1998. Articles 1, 2, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 (Amended by PLS-117/2002).
63. COAF (Consejo de Control de actividades financieras) Resolutions No. 01 (1999), No. 03 (1999), No. 04 (1999), No. 05 (1999), No. 08 (1999), No. 09 (2000) approved legislation making the financing of terrorism a crime.
64. “Brazil.” International Human Rights Law Institute. October 24, 2004.
65. “Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2003.” U.S. State Department.
66. Marc Perelman. “Tracking Terror’s Money Trail in Lawless Frontier.” The Forward. December 13, 2002.
67. “Commentary: Brazil extradites terror suspect.” UPI. November 18, 2003.
68. “Patterns of Global Terrorism, 2003.” U.S. State Department. wwwsft13.shtml
69. This includes the Anti-corruption Statute, Act No. 190: reporting of irregularities; Article 325 of the Penal Code: non-compliance with control mechanisms; Decree No. 1957: reporting of documents linked to money-laundering activities; Financial Institutions Statute, Decree No. 663: reporting of irregularities; Act No. 333, Article 2, paragraph 4: termination of ownership rights; and Article 67 of the Code of Criminal Procedure: freezing of any assets linked to criminal activities, including terrorism.
70. “Colombia.” International Human Rights Law Institute. October 24, 2004.
71. Colombian Penal Code, Section 345 – Management of Resources Linked to Terrorist Acts.
73. Marcelo Venegas. “Proyecto de ley que crea la unidad de analysis financiero y modifica el codigo penal en material de lavado de dinero.” Comunidad Virtual de Gobernabilidad.
74. These include the Federal Organized Crime Act, Article 29; the Federal Penal Code, Articles 40 and 41; and the Federal Code of Criminal Procedure, Article 181. Legislation may be found at ihrli/_downloads/publications/Mexico.pdf
75. For a comprehensive list of legislation, see ihrli/_downloads/publications/Peru.pdf
76. Kantor, p. 13.
77. Rachel Ehrenfeld. Funding Evil. Illinois: Bonus Books, 2003, p.176.
78. Schmahl, p. 43.
79. Kantor, p. 15.

go back Arrow

Design: Gala-Studio   Layout, programing, hosting: Virtual Style Ltd
All rights reserved © Jerusalem Summit