Module 3 – Main Takeaways

To assist countries in understanding what an effective system under IO.6 looks like, the Methodology lists
the following characteristics:

• Timely access to a broad range of reports, data, and other relevant, accurate, and up-to-date
information assists the FIU and other competent authorities in performing their functions.
• Sufficient resources and skills to conduct the analysis and produce financial intelligence that supports
the operational needs of competent authorities.
• Effective cooperation and exchange of information securely and regularly between the FIU and other
competent authorities.
• Effective use of financial intelligence and other relevant information to develop evidence, identify
and trace assets, criminal proceeds or instrumentalities and investigate money laundering,
associated predicate offences and terrorist financing.

IO.6 Effectiveness Indicators

Core
Objective
Issue
To what extent does the FIU access a broad range of
reports, data and other information (STRs received,
cash transaction reports, cross-border declarations
or disclosures on currency and bearer negotiable
instruments and other sources of information) to
perform its functions?
To what extent do other competent authorities access
6.1
a broad range of reports, data and other information
(including information from STRs, where allowed by
national legislation) to perform their functions?
Do these reports and information sources contain
relevant, accurate and up to date data, and does
the FIU and other relevant competent authorities
have timely access to them?
To what extent is the FIU producing and
disseminating financial intelligence to support
operational needs of competent authorities? Where
6.2
relevant, to what extent are other competent
authorities also producing financial intelligence using
accessible FIU data and other relevant information
that support their needs?
Indicators of effectiveness
- Number of STRs provided by the
different regulated entities.
- FIUs strategic reports are produced and
disseminated with operational
authorities.
- FIU access to a wide variety of financial
information (public and private sector
data bases).
- The FIU can verify the accuracy and
timeliness of the financial information
used in their reporting systems.
- The FIU has mechanisms in place to
disseminate their analysis to LEAs
and prosecutors.
- Information sharing mechanisms in
place for tax authorities, customs and
LEAs to access the FIU financial
information (i.e, roundtables, shared
access to data bases,
among others)

1
Introduction to the FATF Global Standards, Methodology and Procedures – Module 3

To what extent do the FIU and other competent
authorities co-operate and exchange financial
intelligence and information?
How securely do the FIU and other competent
6.3
authorities protect the confidentiality of the
information they exchange or use (including financial
intelligence disseminated to competent authorities by
the FIU)?
To what extent do competent authorities use
financial intelligence and other relevant information
6.4 in investigations to develop evidence, identify assets
and trace criminal proceeds or instrumentalities
related to ML, associated predicate offenses and TF?
- Interagency cooperations mechanisms in
place to coordinate the information
sharing of financial information.
- The FIU is capable of disseminating
information to LEAs and prosecutors.
- Competent authorities round tables or
joint investigations teams in place to share
sensitive information.
- Information sharing mechanisms in place to
guarantee the information confidentiality.
- LEAs and prosecutors rely on financial
intelligence to either start a financial
investigation or to develop evidence.
- Parallel financial investigations
targets natural and legal persons but
also their assets.

To assist countries in understanding what an effective system under IO.7 looks like, the Methodology lists
the following characteristics:

• ML activities should be prioritised at a national and operational level. This should be in line with the
risk in the country.
• ML activities, particularly major proceeds-generating offences, are investigated, offenders are
successfully prosecuted, and the courts apply effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions to
those convicted.
• Authorities pursue parallel financial investigations and cases where the associated predicate offences
occur outside the country and investigate and prosecute stand-alone ML offences. The components
of the systems (investigation, prosecution, conviction, and sanctions) are functioning coherently to
mitigate the ML risks.
• Countries’ investigators and prosecutors should be appropriately resourced and trained.
• Ultimately, the prospect of detection, conviction and punishment dissuades potential criminals from
carrying out proceeds generating crimes and ML.

IO.7 Effectiveness Indicators

Core
Objective Indicators of effectiveness
Issue
- Level of information sharing between the
FIU and LEAs.
- ML investigations initiated at a
How well, and in what circumstances is ML activity
law enforcement level.
7.1 identified and investigated (including through
- Number of parallel financial investigations.
parallel financial investigations)?
- Specific ML and special techniques of
investigations trainings.
- Joint law enforcement investigations teams

2
Introduction to the FATF Global Standards, Methodology and Procedures – Module 3

To what extent is ML activity (including different
7.2 types of ML cases) being prosecuted and offenders
convicted?
To what extent are the sanctions applied against
7.3 natural or legal persons convicted of ML offenses
effective, proportionate and dissuasive?
To what extent do countries apply other criminal
justice measures in case where a ML investigation
has been pursued but where it is not possible, for
7.4 justifiable reasons to secure a ML conviction? Such
alternative measures should not diminish the
importance or, of be a substitute for, prosecutions
and convictions for ML offences.
- ML offences charges because of a parallel
financial investigation.
- Level of information sharing between the
LEAs and Prosecutors.
- ML specialised prosecutors and/or units.
- ML Third-party, stand-alone and/or self-
laundering cases are prosecuted and convicted.
- Application of civil, administrative
and/or criminal sanctions.
- ML convictions extended to the legal
persons acting as sham companies to obscure
the identity of the natural person.
- Sanctions imposed for ML compared with
those for other comparable criminal activity.
- Disruption of cross-border cash flows.
- Predicate offenses charges for those cases
in which the ML conviction is not possible.

To assist countries in understanding what an effective system under IO.8 looks like, the Methodology
lists the following characteristics:

• Criminals are deprived (though timely use of provisional and confiscation measures) of the proceeds
and instrumentalities of their crimes (domestic and foreign) or property of an equivalent value.
• Confiscation includes proceeds recovered through criminal, civil or administrative processes.
• Competent authorities should use a wide range of tools and processes to pursue confiscation
wherever money or assets are in the world and to secure borders against unreported cash and bearer
negotiable instruments.
• Confiscation arising from false cross-border disclosures or declarations and restitution to victims
(through court proceedings).
• The country manages seized or confiscated assets and repatriates, or shares confiscated assets with
other countries.
• Ultimately, this makes crime unprofitable and reduces both predicate crimes and ML.

3
Introduction to the FATF Global Standards, Methodology and Procedures – Module 3
 IO.8 Effectiveness Indicators
Core
Objective
Issue
To what extent is confiscation of criminal
8.1 proceeds, instrumentalities and property of
equivalent value pursued as a policy objective?
How well are the competent authorities
confiscating (including repatriations, sharing and
restitution) the proceeds and instrumentalities of
8.2 crimes and property of an equivalent value,
involving domestic and foreign predicate offenses
and proceeds which have been moved to other
countries?
To what extent is confiscation regarding falsely/
not declared or disclosed cross-border movements
of currency and bearer negotiable instruments
8.3
being addressed and applied as an effective,
proportionate and dissuasive sanction by
border/custom or other relevant authorities?
How well do the confiscations results reflect the profile and the origin of asset confiscation
8.4 assessment(s) for ML/TF risks and national AML/CFT cases.
policies and priorities?
Indicators of effectiveness
- Asset confiscation, recovery and
management are prioritised at a national level.
- Non-conviction-based confiscation is
regulated in the country’s legal framework
when possible.
- LEAs and prosecutors are requested to target
the criminal organisations’ assets in their
investigations.
- LEAs, Prosecutors and Judges understand how
the asset confiscation procedure works and
their role in the process.
- Level of information sharing among
operational authorities and authorities
holding financial information.
- Number of (informal/formal)
international cooperation requests.
- Power to suspend or withhold consent to
transactions and freeze and seize expeditiously.
- Cases of cash confiscation at the borders.
- Resources allocated to customs controls.
- Mechanisms in place to identify falsely/non-
declared or disclosed cross-border movements
of currency and bearer negotiable instruments.
- Coherency between the country’s risk
- Once the ML/TF risk is identified, actions are
taken in order to freeze and confiscate criminals’
assets and instrumentalities.

4
Introduction to the FATF Global Standards, Methodology and Procedures – Module 3