Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Mid
    Mid is offline
    Thailand Expat
    Mid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    1,413

    Pressure heaped on Barclays bank

    Pressure heaped on Barclays bank
    JOSEPH ALLCHIN
    20 August 2010


    Customer withdraws cash from a Barclays ATM in London
    (Reuters)

    Britain’s Trades Union Congress (TUC) has released a stinging critique on UK banking giant Barclays, who have been fined some US$300 million by US courts for violating sanctions.

    In a press release the TUC General Secretary, Brendan Barber, said: “It’s a disgrace that Barclays has been violating US sanctions and doing business in Burma. Foreign financial services are helping Burmese generals to loot the country’s natural wealth and to fund a military accused of committing horrendous crimes against humanity.”

    Since DVB covered the story it has been revealed that only US$460,000 – a relatively small amount of the total money that was laundered for sanctioned institutions by the bank – was from Burma. The other countries listed in the case were Cuba, Iran, Libya and Sudan.

    It has also transpired however that some of the transactions were processed in the EU, raising the question of why the bloc has so far taken no action against the bank, and why it has seemingly not enforced sanctions in a stricter manner, if at all. Barclays, as well as Lloyds and Abn Amro, have all been charged in US courts with sanctions-related infringements, and all three are EU-based.

    “It is a cause for concern that it took the US sanctions system to discover the shameful activities of a British bank. The UK and the EU urgently need to fix our weak rules. We need to put in place US-style financial sanctions and a rigorous monitoring system to prevent these sorts of scandals from happening again” Barber asserted.

    It comes at a time when trust in financial institutions is at an all-time low after their operations had a catastrophic effect on the global economy, with the effects felt hardest in western economies. Furthermore, the news came out shortly after Britain’s new prime minister, David Cameron, pledged to aid the cause of democracy in Burma.

    The General Secretary of the Federation of Trade Unions of Burma (FTUB), Maung Maung, added: “This scandal must be a wake-up call for the UK government. We already know that insurance syndicates within Lloyds of London have been doing business in Burma, and now Barclays. What else has the City of London been up to? The UK government needs to investigate this fully and cut off all financial and insurance links to the regime.”

    Meanwhile the European Parliamentary Caucasus on Burma (EPCB), which represents MPs from 15 European countries, added their weight to calls for a UN commission of enquiry into the alleged crimes of the junta, urging EU states to officially back the call.

    The enquiry “would allow a thorough investigation and documentation of these crimes, along with the formation of recommendations on future actions and policies, is a crucial step that the international community should support,” it said.

    The impetus for the call for the enquiry came from Tomas Ojea Quintana, the UN Special Rapporteur on Burma who, after stating that “gross and systematic” crimes against humanity and war crimes were being committed by the junta, has been banned from visiting the country.

    The Barclays case will also raise concerns about banking practices, as no prosecutions were made and the bank “cooperated” with courts and paid US$298 charge. “In conducting this investigation, Barclays worked closely and constructively with the US Authorities. The US Authorities have recognised Barclays substantial cooperation in the resolution,” a press release from the bank said.

    Despite the recession, banks continue to find themselves in powerful positions, able to effectively avoid prosecution through pay-outs and through “working closely” with bodies whom the public has charged with the responsibility of prosecuting offenders, and not sheltering guilty parties.

    dvb.no

  2. #2
    Thailand Expat
    keda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Last Online
    17-12-2010 @ 12:06 PM
    Posts
    9,831
    Sanctions only work if you have the jurisdiction, the authority, the power, and the determination to enforce them.

    The scope for profit leaves the banks well happy to plod along raking it in with the occasional overhead of a fine, and that's only if the right agencies bother both to investigate and can prove any charges.

    They know they're 'too big to be busted and sent down', and that's what matters.

    Reminds me of the clip in Blazing Saddles where the Sheriff holds a gun to his head and threatens to shoot if the citizens don't back off.

  3. #3
    Thailand Expat
    BobR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Online
    25-05-2019 @ 12:56 PM
    Posts
    7,760
    Considering the size of the American trade deficit, its 10% plus unemployment, the daily declines in the value of the Dollar and the willingness of other nations to provide goods and services, can the USA really afford to impose these childish sanctions or boycotts against anyone they do not like any longer? Sell Iran passenger planes, sell anyone who has money banking services, at this point they should be taking business where ever they can find it.

  4. #4
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    22-10-2011 @ 02:56 PM
    Location
    Republic of the Union of Myanmar
    Posts
    3,081
    That's what I love about the Americans...they are so whiter than white when it comes to standing up against the breaking of sanctions, financial regulations, illegal arms sale to name but only a few!

    Thank God for the American example of clean, uncomplicated business dealings, anti corruption, efficient regulatory laws and honest politcal values the whole world over.

    Ok they've had a few glitches and they're in debt past their eyeballs but they still mange keep the wheels on. (just)

    God bless America for sure! Ride em cowboy!

  5. #5
    Mid
    Mid is offline
    Thailand Expat
    Mid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Posts
    1,413
    US Judge Rejects ‘Sweetheart’ Deal on Barclays Sanction Busting
    WILLIAM BOOT
    Saturday, August 21, 2010

    The US government has been criticized by a Washington judge for being soft on British bank Barclays over its flouting of financial sanctions against Burma.

    The judge this week refused to accept a plea deal by Barclays—which also has businesses in America—in which it agreed to pay US $298 million damages after admitting to covering up secret financial transactions with several sanctioned countries, including Burma, between 1995 and 2006.

    Barclays made 46 fund transfers worth $490,000 involving Burma, reports The Guardian newspaper in London.

    The bank confessed to operating a filter system which monitored any transactions involving countries under US legal sanctions.

    “Barclays staff stripped identifying names from payment information in a deliberate ruse to defy US sanctions against repressive regimes,” said The Guardian, quoting American prosecutors.

    The US government agreed to accept Barclays' fine in what Washington judge Emmet Sullivan this week described as a sweetheart deal.

    When the deal was presented to court for formal approval, Sullivan rejected it, asking why individuals who had planned the deception had not been prosecuted.

    Sullivan’s objections put the settlement in doubt and there will be another court hearing in Washington on the issue next Wednesday.

    irrawaddy.org

  6. #6
    I am in Jail

    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Online
    22-10-2011 @ 02:56 PM
    Location
    Republic of the Union of Myanmar
    Posts
    3,081
    "The US government has been criticized by a Washington judge for being soft on British bank Barclays over its flouting of financial sanctions against Burma"

    I don't suppose its possible that one or two American banks may have done something similar?

    Lets face it in todays world "business is business"

  7. #7
    R.I.P
    Mr Lick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Last Online
    25-09-2014 @ 02:50 PM
    Location
    Mountain view
    Posts
    40,028
    A Washington judge going after a bank? Doesn't he realise who's running the planet?

  8. #8
    Thailand Expat
    keda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Last Online
    17-12-2010 @ 12:06 PM
    Posts
    9,831
    Quote Originally Posted by Mid View Post
    US Judge Rejects ‘Sweetheart’ Deal on Barclays Sanction Busting
    WILLIAM BOOT
    Saturday, August 21, 2010

    The US government has been criticized by a Washington judge for being soft on British bank Barclays over its flouting of financial sanctions against Burma.

    The judge this week refused to accept a plea deal by Barclays—which also has businesses in America—in which it agreed to pay US $298 million damages after admitting to covering up secret financial transactions with several sanctioned countries, including Burma, between 1995 and 2006.

    Barclays made 46 fund transfers worth $490,000 involving Burma, reports The Guardian newspaper in London.

    The bank confessed to operating a filter system which monitored any transactions involving countries under US legal sanctions.

    “Barclays staff stripped identifying names from payment information in a deliberate ruse to defy US sanctions against repressive regimes,” said The Guardian, quoting American prosecutors.

    The US government agreed to accept Barclays' fine in what Washington judge Emmet Sullivan this week described as a sweetheart deal.

    When the deal was presented to court for formal approval, Sullivan rejected it, asking why individuals who had planned the deception had not been prosecuted.

    Sullivan’s objections put the settlement in doubt and there will be another court hearing in Washington on the issue next Wednesday.

    irrawaddy.org
    Just as Swiss cheese sanctions don't work when there are so many holes to wade through, fines don't work against financial institutions that are found guilty of sanction busting.

    What might work, though, is to send those culpable on the board to prison, or hold them personally liable for fines and other financial penalties, including the full cost of investigations leading to their conviction.

    Shareholders also have a right to be upset, at being held liable for the illegal actions of those charged with working to their best interests.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •