Don’t make joining the FATF a matter of pride
Don’t make joining the FATF a matter of pride. The FATF, which stands for the Financial Action Task Force, is one of those terms that perhaps most people around the world, apart from politicians and economic activists, have heard less of. However, in our country, for nearly a decade, people have become familiar with this term, and discussions around it range from technical and specialized issues to political topics circulating in various media and forums. So much so that if we talk to people from different walks of life, they speak about its intricacies in such a way that once again we encounter a polarization similar to many existing political and social issues in society.
Some believe that resolving part of the country’s economic problems and economic relations with the world depends on its approval by the Expediency Discernment Council and exiting its blacklist. Others see it as another tool of international pressure on Iran. Amid these discussions, the efforts of governments and the role of governments in joining it are once again brought up. This topic, now with a change in government and considering the statements made during the election campaigns about expanding economic relations with the world, is being pursued by the government of Masoud Pezeshkian once again, and the debates and divisions in the political and media space have expanded.
Just yesterday, Abolfazl Aboutorabi, the representative of Najafabad in the parliament, opposed the discussions that have arisen in recent days on this matter. He stated regarding the resolution of the FATF issue, saying that the parliament will never bear this disgrace and we will not join Palermo. He mentioned that the FATF has two very important issues that the parliament must approve. The first is joining Palermo. If we join the Palermo Convention, all liberation movements like Hezbollah and Hamas will be recognized as terrorist organizations, meaning we are cutting off our own powerful hands.
As long as the Islamic Consultative Assembly does not approve Palermo, joining the FATF is not possible. He continued by stating that the FATF is a tool and a weapon in the hands of the enemy to pressure us so that we are forced to give them our data. He emphasized that today data and information are very valuable, and they want to take our information and use it in a war against us. This parliament member, regarding the president’s order for economic and high-level institutions to cooperate to resolve concerns about the FATF issue, said that it will not be resolved. One institution in this regard is the parliament. The parliament must decide on these two remaining issues, one of which is Palermo, and it must definitely come to the parliament according to the constitution, and the parliament will not accept this disgrace and will not vote for it. On the other hand, the leader’s emphasis has been that instead of putting our energy into joining the FATF, why don’t we strengthen the fight against money laundering, for which a high council has been formed.
Discussions of recent days
A year ago, in the same month of Mehr, Seyed Ehsan Khandozi, the government’s economic spokesperson, denied the government’s attempt to reintroduce joining the FATF by Seyed Ebrahim Raisi’s government in the Expediency Discernment Council and said that the Islamic Republic’s policy on the FATF has not changed, and regardless of international conventions, we fight money laundering according to our beliefs and believe that the Financial Action Task Force should look at issues technically.
And now Masoud Pezeshkian, who during the presidential election was opposed to restrictive, anti-development, and fundamentalist views, spoke about resolving commercial issues with the world, negotiation, and preventing the building of walls around the country. It was with this perspective and approach that he was able to gain the upper hand and make the majority of those who participated and voted in the elections vote for him and win the election. In other words, more than being a victory for Pezeshkian as a support from the people for a political organization and movement, it was a victory from the people saying no to the rival movement, which ironically was beating the drum of war and further restriction of the country. Now, as the president, he must pursue the demands and expectations of the people.
In a press conference with journalists, in response to a question from an economic reporter about how the fourteenth government can help alleviate poverty and improve the economy by addressing imbalances, he said regarding lifting sanctions, we have no choice but to solve the FATF issue. I will certainly write a letter to the Expediency Discernment Council to bring the FATF issue back into the flow so we can solve it, and it must be solved.
A week later, Fatemeh Mohajerani, the government spokesperson, also mentioned this issue in a press conference and, in response to a question about the re-examination of the FATF in the Expediency Discernment Council, said that the issue is being pursued in coordination with the Expediency Discernment Council and with national interests in mind. Lifting sanctions, given the statements of the Supreme Leader, has made it clear because he emphasized that wherever it is possible to lift sanctions, it should be done. Negotiations are a two-way street, and all groups must strive to lift them. We are trying to lift the sanctions, but everyone must make an effort.
Following these statements, the media pursued the issue through various channels, and of course, government officials also spoke about it at different times.
As Abdolnaser Hemmati, the Minister of Economy, wrote on his account on the social network X, considering the repeated efforts of the country’s enemies to create financial restrictions for Iran, which is one of the influential aspects of the sanctions on Iran, this morning I presented a report on the current situation and the necessary actions for normalizing Iran’s case in the FATF to the president. These actions are different from what is said in the media. He ordered that necessary actions to lift restrictions and suspend the countermeasures of the Financial Action Task Force FATF be pursued within the framework of the country’s national interests, and at the same time, address internal concerns and worries in this regard through the cooperation of economic institutions with the Supreme National Security Council.
With cooperation and consensus, we will reduce financial restrictions against Iran.
For example, Majid Ansari, the legal deputy of the president, also emphasized in this regard that technically, this issue falls within the scope of our colleagues’ work in the Ministry of Economy and Finance, the Central Bank, and other relevant authorities. However, from a legal work process perspective, you are aware that the two remaining conventions from the FATF package, one of which is organized crime and the Palermo issue, were both left dormant in the Expediency Discernment Council.
The Expediency Discernment Council also removed this issue from its agenda due to the permission it had. There is a possibility that if the assembly reaches a final consensus and the process is followed, with the green light from the council, the FATF could be placed back on the council’s agenda.
Moreover, if the president and the cabinet decide to pursue the issue, there is the capacity for the Expediency Discernment Council to bring this issue back into the flow. The process of approving the FATF in the parliament has been completed. The issue has come to the council and, due to considerations, is currently dormant.
If the assembly concludes that actions are needed, I predict that the council will cooperate and collaborate with the government, and the FATF will be approved.
In this regard, Jafar Qaempanah, the executive deputy of the president, also announced that the letter requesting the re-examination of the FATF will be sent by the government to the Expediency Discernment Council. This practically indicates the efforts of the fourteenth government to achieve a council resolution on the FATF and end this case. This issue, on the other hand, has staunch opponents, one of the most important of whom are parliament members who claim that joining this task force must pass through the parliament gate once again.
On the other side of the story
In recent days, as the issue of pursuing the FATF has been raised, the opposing faction of the government has once again expressed their opposition to its approval.
For example, Kayhan newspaper, in its special news column, emphasized that the FATF is a completely politicized task force with a legal facade, and wrote that the main suspects of money laundering and terrorist financing in the world govern this task force.
Currently, 76% of major money laundering operations in the world take place in the United States and Europe, and these are also the largest political and financial supporters in the world.
An important point that Mr. Hemmati, Ansari, and others are surely aware of is Mr. Zarif’s response to an important question about the FATF. When Rouhani’s government officials were faced with the question of what guarantee exists that by implementing the other two demands of the FATF, sanctions would be reduced and not increased, they said, based on instructive realities, that there is no guarantee.
The article continues: From the perspective of Western countries, activities carried out to circumvent sanctions are considered money laundering, and some institutions and groups that play a key role in securing the country, such as the Revolutionary Guards and regional resistance groups, are considered terrorist groups. If these standards are accepted, the Islamic Republic is obliged to refrain from providing financial services to institutions and individuals that are considered terrorism by the FATF or other countries.
This action would lead to the internal sanctioning of the country’s security institutions, self-sanctioning, and naturally, the reduction of the capabilities of security and military institutions would endanger the country’s security. A day later, in another article, it was mentioned again, stating that now, right in the middle of the greatest battle between truth and falsehood, which many believe is supposed to determine the fate of many things, including the fate of the region, some have once again brought up the FATF Financial Action Task Force issue, and this topic has been on their lips and pens for several days.
Some have even written that without it, national consensus will not be formed. They constantly say that this issue must be resolved so that many economic and even non-economic problems of the country are resolved. On the other hand, one of the main reasons for opponents of the FATF is that the definition of terrorism by the Financial Action Task Force differs from our definition of terrorism.
According to their definition, our Revolutionary Guards, Hezbollah of Lebanon, and Palestinian fighters are terrorists. Moreover, the United States and the Zionist regime have strong influence in this special group. While Marshall Billingslea, the then-president of the FATF, explicitly admitted in a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee that we have close cooperation with Israel and Saudi Arabia to counter Iran, and Matthew Levitt, director of the Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, recently emphasized that the FATF’s oversight of Iran’s international activities should be increased. One of the ways to weaken Iran’s proxy groups, the axis of resistance, and the empowerment of proxy wars is to expand oversight of Iran’s banking activities.
Now, think a little about these few lines and the subject of this note. Is bringing up the outdated and dangerous FATF issue, which during Rouhani’s government, 39 out of 41 of its demands were implemented, and its detrimental consequences are still felt, in the middle of a major combined and decisive war, a coincidence? Some in Iran, either out of ignorance or for any other reason, have started suspicious efforts to revive this dead issue, whose first and last goal, whether they know it or not, is to weaken the axis of resistance in the middle of the war. Serving the Zionist regime couldn’t be clearer.
Meanwhile, other opponents also reacted to the government’s efforts. For example, Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghadam, a member of the Expediency Discernment Council, recently stated in an interview, referring to the halt in reviewing the acceptance of the two remaining FATF recommendations in the council, that the FATF issue in the council is stopped, and this halt in reviews is not related to today. Although some media mistakenly raised the issue of Iran joining the Financial Action Task Force against money laundering, the point is that the Islamic Republic of Iran has implemented 39 out of 41 recommendations of this group, and the joining issue is misleading and incomplete.
The reason for not accepting the two remaining recommendations, according to experts, is that accepting these two recommendations would lead to internal sanctions on the country and prevent many of Iran’s financial interactions. In addition, raising the issue of sending a letter to the council will have consequences for the country’s economy and political space. In a situation where the government intends to organize the country’s economy, the FATF issue is not very relevant and raising it leaves many negative effects on the market. Issues like the FATF have a studyable past that everyone should know about.
Currently, we are not in an election season where we want to gather votes, so we must deal with such phenomena more measuredly, accurately, and based on more precise documentation. Complete information on the FATF case is available and must be reviewed, and if we want to use the FATF for advertising purposes, it is a very wrong action.
Or Mostafa Mirsalim, another member of the council, stated that no letter has been sent by the government to the council. In response to the question of whether the positions of the council members have changed regarding this bill or if there is a possibility of changing their position, he said that the main point in the government’s joining the Financial Action Task Force is the necessity of lifting the oppressive sanctions imposed on the Islamic Republic. The Islamic Republic has internally passed strong laws to prevent any financial support for terrorism and to prevent money laundering and is committed to them. However, the United States and its followers are trying to prevent any support for liberation movements by labeling them as terrorists through organizations and structures like the Financial Action Task Force, and to maintain their oppression and aggression in the world.
We have a real disagreement with the United States and its followers in defining the examples of a group, organization, or terrorist action. We consider Israel and the seventy-year genocides of the Zionists as a clear example of terrorism, and the support of the United States and Westerners for the bloodthirsty Israel as a perfect example of supporting terrorism. Among the recent actions of the United States is sending weapons and ammunition to Israel to suppress the oppressed Palestinian rights seekers in Gaza, and they shamelessly call the Revolutionary Guards and the resistance front terrorists and constantly increase the number and types of their oppressive sanctions against us. It does not seem that as long as they remain in their clear hostility position, a new result can be achieved. Everyone believes that not joining the Financial Action Task Force has damages for us, but joining it without lifting the sanctions has more harms, and naturally, between bad and worse, we should not choose the worse.
The claim of the parliament members
Simultaneously with these statements and emphases on the lack of change in the council’s opinion, parliament representatives also raised the issue of the expiration of the review of the tenth parliament’s resolution in this regard in the council. For example, Alireza Salimi, the spokesperson for the parliament’s presidium, announced that given that the time for reviewing bills like Palermo and CFT has ended, these bills must be sent to the parliament and reviewed through the parliament. Therefore, it can be said that joining the FATF is not a decision that can be made solely by the government, and reaching such an agreement requires the cooperation of various legislative and executive institutions.
And yesterday, Aboutorabi brought it up again. Of course, regarding the end of the review period of bills in the council, various discussions have been raised. Previously, Mohammad Sadr, a member of the Expediency Discernment Council, stated that there is no time frame for addressing the bills and plans sent to the council, emphasizing that regarding the two bills of Palermo and CFT, given the four-month deadline of the FATF, it is intended to resolve the issue before that, but there is no time frame set for the council according to the regulations. Ali Taqizadeh, a constitutional lawyer and a representative of the sixth parliament, in an interview with Ham Mihan, said that Article 112 of the Constitution does not set a specific time frame for the Expediency Discernment Council to address issues and resolve disputes. The government can pursue this parliamentary resolution in the Expediency Discernment Council. Of course, changes have been made in the council’s regulations, which if applied retroactively, may create limitations for further pursuit.
As stated in Article 112 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Expediency Discernment Council is formed to determine the expediency in cases where the Guardian Council considers a parliamentary resolution contrary to Sharia or the Constitution, and the parliament, considering the expediency of the system, does not provide the Guardian Council’s opinion, and for consultation on matters referred to them by the leadership and other tasks mentioned in this law, at the order of the leadership. The fixed and variable members of this council are determined by the leadership.
The regulations related to the council are prepared and approved by the members themselves and will be approved by the leadership. Of course, he also refers to the council’s internal regulations and says that limitations should be reviewed based on that. The issue that can expand discussions and become the main basis is this internal regulation of the council, which before the current regulation, approved in August 2023, creates dual conditions. In the previous regulation, there was no limitation on reintroducing topics in the council over time, and Article 25 stated that the president could also request the council to address the resolution. The council president would also place the conflicting resolution on the council’s agenda if necessary. However, in this new regulation, approved last year, there are limitations.
Article 31 states that the maximum time for the council to comment on parliamentary resolutions that do not meet the Guardian Council’s opinion is three months. If more time is needed to address the parliamentary resolution, based on the proposal of the relevant commission and the approval of the council president, the mentioned time can be extended for up to three months. Note 1: In cases where there is a time constraint, such as resolutions approved in the parliament with two or three urgencies and resolutions related to the budget, comments are provided within a maximum of one month. Note 2: If the council’s expediency opinion is not issued by the end of the above periods, the Guardian Council’s opinion will prevail. Based on this, regarding the council’s opinion and the government’s pursuit through the council, it must be seen whether the current regulation is applied retroactively or if this issue returns to the conflicting cases after the regulation change.
If applied to previous conflicting cases, the review of Palermo or Iran’s accession to the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime was also removed from the council’s agenda on October 9, 2019. Additionally, two other bills under the FATF, namely the bill to amend the Anti-Terrorism Financing Act and the bill to amend the Anti-Money Laundering Act, were respectively approved by the parliament and confirmed by the Guardian Council on August 8, 2018, and January 5, 2019, becoming law.
Therefore, the CFT or Iran’s accession to the Convention on Combating the Financing of Terrorism was the last bill under the FATF that was rejected by the Guardian Council and was referred to the Expediency Discernment Council as a conflicting bill between the parliament and the Guardian Council. Now, if accepted based on the recent regulation in accordance with Article 25, this issue can be raised for re-examination in the council at the request of the government by the leadership.
Iran and the FATF warnings
The first FATF warning to Iran was given in 2007, in a year when the seventh parliament passed the Anti-Money Laundering Act, which was also approved by the Guardian Council. From this year until 2009, Iran received a total of five warnings from the FATF, and ultimately, in 2009, Iran’s name was raised for the first time in topics related to the FATF. After that, the tenth government, in 2011, submitted the Anti-Terrorism Financing bill to the parliament, and this bill was approved in the parliament but was ultimately rejected by the Guardian Council.
In fact, the first efforts to join this group were raised during Ahmadinejad’s government, but at that time, few people spoke about it. It seems that during Ahmadinejad’s era, this issue was quietly and secretly being pursued, a topic that came to the forefront after the end of Ahmadinejad’s presidency. Ghasem Mirzaei-Niko, a former parliament member, said in an interview that during the previous period, people like Jalili and Ahmadinejad and others were working in the FATF domain and had it in their program and were trying to get it approved.
Saeed Jalili, the then Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, at that time, called for Iran to join this financial group and in 2011, declared joining the FATF necessary in a letter. After that, Jalili, with the coming to power of Hassan Rouhani’s government, became an opponent of this decision, and of course, this change of stance was also seen in figures like Ahmadinejad. It seems that Sadeq Amoli Larijani, Ahmad Jannati, Mohsen Rezaei, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Hossein Mozaffar, Gholamreza Mesbahi Moghadam, Ahmad Vahidi, Parviz Davoodi, and Saeed Jalili are the nine opponents of the FATF in the Expediency Discernment Council, whose recent statements do not show any change of stance, but ultimately, its return to the council and the government’s efforts for persuasion might bring about a change.
In the three years of Ebrahim Raisi’s government, there was a special emphasis on the fact that the government has no intention of making such a decision and will not pursue it. Now, once again, a government has come to power that looks to remove barriers to communication with the world, and this time, people, knowing the background of these individuals and with the explicit explanations of Pezeshkian as a candidate in the fourteenth presidential election, voted for him.
At this juncture, which once again forms a bipolar pro and con issue, the question that might come to many of our minds is how should people act if they want to pursue certain macro-level issues. Naturally, a change in policies and decisions in democratic societies is possible with elections and choosing a reformist option. However, now in the country, we see that despite the presence of the republic’s wing and the late leader’s statement that the measure is the people’s vote and the leader’s words on the right to determine destiny, now in various matters, despite the people’s will and vote for change and reform, the opposing radical faction is trying to prevent reform programs and practically make these efforts by labeling them as serving Israel and making the government inefficient and a matter of pride.
In other words, by politicizing the FATF, which according to experts in the government, joining it is not a mistake, they are trying to add this topic to the existing taboos in governance and probably with this presumption, make the communication paths with the world less than they are.