By: Dwight Links
The Financial Intelligence Centre (FIC) provided a presentation on the compliance factors that exist within the financial sector.
The special briefing session led by Bryan Eiseb, Director of the FIC, had the aim to explain the importance of reporting obligations under the Financial Intelligence Act (FIA).
Organised by the Civil Society Information Centre Namibia (Civic +264), the presentation was meant to provide clarity on how civil society organisation (CSO) compliance affects Namibia’s standing in the global financial system and how CSOs can avoid common reporting issues.
Selma Nakambale, senior compliance officer at the FIC, outlined that one of the compliance measures the FIC has to take into consideration is the potential of financing stemming from terrorist organisations and how Namibians can inadvertently play an active role in the flow of such funds.
“One example has been that people claim not to know of any linkages to ISIS (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) and the donors who send money to people in the CSO realm. Know exactly who your donors are and know who your beneficiaries are,” Nakambale outlined.
She also noted that non-profit organisations (NPOs) stand the greatest risk of exposure to potential affiliations that have far-reaching consequences.
“Another case was a Namibian gentleman who went to Cape Town to study and work there. He was then radicalised in South Africa and went to fight in the Middle East conflict zone. He passed away there during combat,” Nakambale added.
Citing the recent visit by American generals to the Ministry of Defence in September, Nakambale outlined that the engagement was based Namibia being warned about potential terrorism threats near the country.
“This exposes the country. It also speaks to the recent South Africans who were flagged internationally,” she remarked in relation to South Africa allowing a US-blacklisted aircraft to land on its soil.
The FIC noted that there was a case of 50 NPOs suspected of terror financing as a result of Bitcoin activities.
Eiseb explored the UN sanctions screening facility that is aimed at checking whether an organisation or an individual has been placed on a global watchlist for possible terror financing.
“This list is a tool against which you have to check whether the donor who sent the money is on it or not. A few days ago, South Africa was flagged for allowing a sanctioned plane to land at its airports,” Eiseb explained.
The plane in question was a Russian Ilyushin IL-76 cargo aircraft, which is blacklisted by the US due to suspicious flights. It landed in Upington on 2 October, with South African media stating that it was heavily loaded.
Eiseb recounted an incident when deals were brokered between Namibia and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, raising eyebrows from international bodies.
“There were listed entities which Namibia had done business with. This almost resulted in a diplomatic row for the country. The requirement is that NPOs should ensure they send or receive money from a non-sanctioned entity. If you do so, it carries the risk of your entity being sanctioned by the UN,” he indicated.
One of the questions from the civil society crowd zoned on the impact that the FIC compliance measures have on law firms and lawyers. Currently, there is a sanction against one law firm.
“The lawyers were complaining that they would have a need for compliance officers. It is not the FIC’s position on the advice we provided – which is that the law firms should have access to a pooled facility that helps with compliance matters pertaining to the FIA. Law firms are not in the same category as NPOs,” Eiseb clarified.
Law firms, according to the FIC, are also accountable organisations to the act which focuses on anti-money laundering measures, anti-terror financing measures, and anti-proliferation financing.
