For Official Use FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3

Financial Action Task Force 

Groupe d’Action Financière 30-Jun-2009 

___________________________________________________________________________________________

English - Or. English 

 

Working Group on Terrorist Financing and Money Laundering 

BEST PRACTICES PAPER ON SPECIAL RECOMMENDATION III 

23 June 2009, Convention Centre, Lyon, France 

This document was produced by the Working Group on Terrorist Financing and Money Laundering (WGTM) at 

its meeting on 23 June 2009, in Lyon, France, and circulated in hard copy at the Plenary meeting of the FATF on 

24-26 June 2009 in Lyon, France. 

Valerie SCHILLING, Tel: +33 1 45 24 99 53; valerie.schilling@fatf-gafi.org 

Richard BERKHOUT, Tel: +33 1 45 24 75 13; richard.berkhout@fatf-gafi.org 

Shunichi FUKUSHIMA, Tel: +33 1 45 24 84 72; shunichi.fukushima@fatf-gafi.org 

JT03267496 

For Official Use FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 English - Or. English
FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 3 

I. Clear authorities and procedures for identifying and designating persons or entities .......................... 4 

A Minimum necessary elements .......................................................................................................... 4 

B Judicial or administrative measures not conditional upon the existence of criminal proceedings .. 5 

C Evidentiary standards: reasonable grounds or basis ......................................................................... 5 

D Authorities to identify, designate and sanction ................................................................................ 6 

E Identifying targets for designation .................................................................................................... 7 

F Meaning of “without delay” in the context of designations ............................................................. 7 

G Use of Intelligence and closed source material ................................................................................ 7 

II. Due process: review, de-listing and unfreezing ................................................................................ 8 

A Notice of designation ........................................................................................................................ 8 

B Review of designation, delisting and unfreezing .............................................................................. 8 

III. Post-designation issues: Freezing and prohibiting dealing in funds or other assets of designated 

persons and entities ..................................................................................................................................... 9 

A Scope of funds or other assets that are subject to freezing action .................................................... 9 

B Freezing assets “without delay” on designation ............................................................................. 10 

C Communication strategy ................................................................................................................. 10 

D Post-freezing reporting and investigation ....................................................................................... 12 

IV. Designated individuals and entities: compliance and access to frozen assets ................................ 13 

A Resident designated individuals and entities .................................................................................. 13 

B Clear domestic authorities and procedures to license the use of or dealing with frozen assets or the 

making of assets available to designated individuals or entities............................................................ 14
 FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 3

INTRODUCTION 

1. FATF Special Recommendation III (SR III) consists of two parts. The first part requires 

jurisdictions to implement measures that will freeze or, if appropriate, seize terrorist-related funds or other 

assets without delay in accordance with relevant United Nations resolutions. The second part of SRpecial 

Recommendation III requires jurisdictions to have measures in place that permit a jurisdiction to seize or 

confiscate terrorist funds or other assets on the basis of an order or mechanism issued by a competent 

authority or a court. 

2. SR III is intended, with regard to its first requirement, to assist jurisdictions in implementing the 

targeted financial sanctions1

 contained in the United Nations Security Council resolutions (UNSCRs) 

relating to the prevention and suppression of the financing of terrorist acts – UNSCR 1267 and its 

successor resolutions and UNSCR 1373 and any successor resolutions related to the freezing, or, if 

appropriate, seizure of terrorist assets. 

3. This Paper sets out non-binding guidance based on updates in relevant UNSCRs and in response 

to challenges faced by jurisdictions in the implementation of the first requirementobligation of SR III 

regarding the development and implementation of targeted financial sanctions. It supersedes the existing 

Best Practices Paper of October 2003. 

4. This Paper does not address authorities and procedures of a counter-terrorist financing regime to 

seize funds or other assets or to confiscate / forfeit funds or other assets, although the process of searching 

for such funds or other assets may be identical in cases of freezing, seizure and confiscation or forfeiture. 

5. Efforts to combat terrorist financing are greatly undermined if jurisdictions do not freeze the 

funds or other assets of designated persons quickly and effectively. Nevertheless, in determining the limits 

of or fostering widespread support for an effective counter-terrorist financing regime, jurisdictions must 

respect human rights, respect the rule of law and recognise the rights of innocent third parties. This Paper 

seeks to assist jurisdictions in developing and implementing targeted financial sanctions to prevent and 

suppress terrorist financing in accordance with relevant UNSCRs and in a manner consistent with these 

fundamental principles, through a robust and transparent targeted financial sanctions regime. 

Importance of an Effective Freezing Regime 

6. Effective freezing regimes are critical to combating the financing of terrorism and accomplish 

much more than freezing the terrorist-related funds or other assets present at any particular time. Effective 

freezing regimes also combat terrorism by: 

a) Deterring non-designated parties who might otherwise be willing to finance terrorist activity. 

b) Exposing terrorist financing “money trails” that may generate leads to previously unknown 

terrorist cells and financiers. 

 

1

 “Targeted financial sanctions” refers to those measures that jurisdictions undertake to implement the 

following economic and financial obligations pursuant to S/RES/1267(1999) and successor resolutions and 

S/RES/1373(2001): (i) freeze assets of persons designated pursuant to UNSCRs 1267 and successor 

resolutions and those that meet the criteria specified in UNSCR 1373; (ii) report any assets frozen to 

competent authorities; and (iii) prohibit unlicensed transactions or dealings with such designated parties. 
FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 4

c) Dismantling terrorist financing networks by encouraging designated persons to disassociate 

themselves from terrorist activity and renounce their affiliation with terrorist groups. 

d) Terminating terrorist cash flows by shutting down the pipelines used to move terrorist related 

funds or other assets. 

e) Forcing terrorists to use more costly and higher risk means of financing their activities, which 

makes them more susceptible to detection and disruption. 

f) Fostering international co-operation and compliance with obligations under UNSCR 1267 and 

UNSCR 1373. 

I. Clear authorities and procedures for identifying and designating persons or entities 

A Minimum necessary elements 

7. The first paragraph of SRIII provides that “Each country should implement measures to freeze 

without delay funds or other assets of terrorists, those who finance terrorism and terrorist organisations in 

accordance with the United Nations resolutions relating to the prevention and suppression of the financing 

of terrorist acts.” Such measures may be either judicial or administrative in nature. To meet the 

requirements of the international obligation under UNSCR 1373, as well as the requirements of SR III, the 

designation procedure should operate to: 

a) Provide for a decision to designate2

 a person or entity. The competent authority for making 

designation decisions can be executive or judicial. 

b) Apply a standard of proof in accordance with the Interpretative Note for SR III (INSR III) (that 

is, “reasonable grounds” or “reasonable basis”). 

c) Be able, where necessary, to operate ex parte the individual or entity whose designation is being 

considered. 

d) Provide for appropriate safeguards for the rights of designated individuals and entities (see 

Section III below). 

e) Apply the asset freeze “without delay” to designated individuals or entities (see Section III 

below). 

f) Apply the asset freeze without prior notice to the designated individual or entity. 

g) Freeze all funds or other assets that are owned or controlled by the designated individual or 

entity, and not just those that can be tied to a particular terrorist act, plot or threat. 

h) Prohibit making any funds or other assets available, directly or indirectly, for the benefit of 

designated individuals or entities, subject to the considerations set out in UNSCR 1452, as 

amended by Resolution 1735 (see section IV.B below). 

 

2

 “Designation” refers to the identification of an individual or entity that is subject to targeted financial 

sanctions pursuant to international obligations under UNSCR 1267 and successor resolutions and UNSCR 

1373, including the legal determination that the relevant sanctions will be applied to the individual or entity 

and the public communication of that determination. 
 FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 5

i) Require reporting of any assets frozen to competent authorities identified for this purpose. 

8. Jurisdictions should consider submitting without delay to the UN Al-Qaieda and Taliban 

Sanctions Committee requests for designation of those individuals or entities, in relation to which the 

relevant competent authority in that jurisdiction believes that it has sufficient evidence to support the 

designation criteria provided for in UNSCR 1267 and subsequent relevant resolutions, including UNSCR 

1617, have been met. 

9. The effective implementation of these measures requires institutional arrangements allowing for 

close co-ordination among financial, intelligence and law enforcement authorities and the incorporation of 

the measures into the jurisdiction’s broader counter-terrorism policy. Jurisdictions should also have in 

place procedures to protect all source information, including intelligence and closed-source materials, used 

in the designation of individuals and entities as being subject to the asset freeze measures. 

B Judicial or administrative measures not conditional upon the existence of criminal 

proceedingsindependent of a criminal process

10. The competent authority for making designation decisions can be administrative or judicial. 

Administrative procedures, for example, imply a decision by an officer of the executive based on 

information provided to that officer and published in an official document of record, such as a government 

gazette. The decision would be subject to the safeguards and review provisions of the jurisdiction’s 

administrative law. Judicial proceedings, for example, imply a mechanism where the case for designation 

is put before a judicial authority for evaluation ex parte the targeted individual or entity and where the 

freezing action takes the form of an enforceable order issued by that authority. This order will be of 

indeterminate duration unless successfully challenged by an affected party. 

11. Measures to freeze terrorist assets may complement criminal proceedings against a designated 

individual or entity, but are not conditional upon the existence of such proceedings. The measures serve as 

a preventive or disruptive tool when criminal action is either not possible or not practical. This does not of 

course prevent freezing procedures as such forming a part of criminal procedures. 

C Evidentiary standards: reasonable grounds or basis 

12. For designations under UNSCR 1373, the competent authority of each jurisdiction will apply the 

legal standards of its own legal system regarding the kind and quantum of evidence for the determination 

that “reasonable grounds” or “reasonable basis” exist for a decision to designate an individual or entity and 

thus initiate an action under a freezing mechanism (see INSR III para 8(b)). This is the case irrespective of 

whether the proposed designation has been put forward on the relevant jurisdiction’s own motion or at the 

request of another jurisdiction. 

13. For the effective implementation of an asset freeze, robust identifying information is essential. 

14. At the extreme end of the scale, poor quality identifiers are an obstacle to the enforcement of an 

asset freeze. Single name identifiers in particular represent problems for enforcement. 

15. Best efforts should therefore be made to ensure as much identifying information as possible is 

provided upon designation, and that such information be updated as more identifying data become 

available. Where operational imperatives allow, jurisdictions may consider postponing a designation in 

situations where there is insufficient identifying information, until further information is available. 
FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 6

D Authorities to identify, designate and sanction 

16. To implement the asset freeze obligations under UNSCRs 1267 and 1373 and the requirements of 

SR III, there will be a need to engage a range of ministries (for example Foreign Affairs, Justice, Treasury, 

Finance, Central Bank, Interior or Public Safety) and agencies (for example security, intelligence, law 

enforcement, Financial Intelligence Unit). 

17. Jurisdictions should have appropriate structures and procedures to ensure the effective 

implementation of the asset freeze mechanism. In this context, jJurisdictions should, for example: 

a) Identify government agencies with the primary responsibilities for: 

(i) Co-ordinating and, where necessary, promoting national implementation of the asset freeze 

obligations under UNSCR 1373 and UNSCR 1267, and the requirements of SR III. 

(ii) Ensuring that a process, comprising key government stakeholders is in place for appropriate 

co-ordination (both within a jurisdiction and with other jurisdictions) and to provide strategic 

policy oversight and direction to promote the implementation process and overcome barriers 

to implementation3

. 

b) Clearly identify which authorities have responsibility for each aspect of the designation 

procedure (and in the case of UNSCR 1267, submission of listing proposals to the Al-Qaida and/

Taliban Sanctions Committee where appropriate) and for the subsequent imposition, enforcement 

and monitoring of the asset freeze, to prevent duplication of roles or regulation amongst agencies. 

c) Ensure Ministries and agencies involved share a common understanding of their mandates, roles 

and responsibilities in complying with the obligations of UNSCR 1373 and UNSCR 1267, and 

the requirements of SR III and undertake regular exchange of information in accordance with 

domestic law. 

d) Establish clear lines of communication among these Ministries and agencies (taking into due 

consideration the procedural requirements of the investigation process) to enable a more holistic 

view to be taken of the range of counter terrorist tools at the disposal of the jJurisdiction, and the 

appropriateness of their use in any given situation. For example: 

(i) Among law enforcement intelligence, finance and home Ministries and agencies to ensure 

that there is access to all the necessary information to identify targets for designation. 

(ii) Among government Ministries and agencies in situations where an individual subject to 

related criminal proceedings is designated (for example, on or shortly after arrest for terrorist 

offences, or for a period following successful prosecution for terrorist offences and pending 

potential forfeiture actions, or maintained during or after a term of imprisonment). 

 

3

 Such a process could be achieved through existing co-ordination processes for related activities (such as 

broader AML/CFT co-ordination committees) or through a dedicated interagency process. 
 FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 7

E Identifying targets for designation 

18. In order to comply with and fulfil the preventive intent of UNSCR 1267 and successor 

resolutions and S/RES/1373(2001), jurisdictions should be able to identify persons and entities that meet 

specific criteria for designation. Jurisdictions should have appropriate legal authorities and procedures, and 

a competent authority or authorities in place, to solicit and consider information from all relevant sources 

to identify, and to collect as much identifier information4

 as possible about, persons and entities that, based 

on reasonable grounds, or a reasonable basis to suspect or believe, 5 meet the criteria for designation in the 

relevant resolution.

19. The targeting process for designation should focus on those individuals and entities that represent 

key elements of terrorist support networks in order to obtain maximum impact in preventing and 

suppressing acts of terrorism. 

F Meaning of “without delay” in the context of designations 

20. In relation to Paragraph 1 of SR III, the obligation referred to is to freeze without delay funds or 

other assets of designated individuals and entities. The INSR III defines “without delay”, in relation to 

UNSCR 1373, to mean that assets should be frozen upon having “reasonable grounds, or a reasonable 

basis, to suspect or believe that a person or entity is a terrorist, one who finances terrorism or a terrorist 

organization”. 

21. “Without delay” must therefore be understood to apply also to the time taken to designate an 

individual or entity pursuant to UNSCR 1373. 

22. INSR III goes on to interpret the need for international co-operation to prevent the flight or 

dissipation of terrorist-linked funds or other assets and to interdict and disrupt their flow swiftly. 

23. To enhance co-operation amongst jurisdictions and expedite the processing of foreign 

designation requests, competent authorities in all jurisdictions are encouraged to share amongst themselves 

information on how the legal standard for designation is applied within their jurisdiction, with examples of 

the type and amount of information it will need to initiate action based upon a foreign designation request. 

This will enable the requesting jurisdiction to tailor its request to meet the standards of the requested 

jurisdiction. 

G Use of iIntelligence and cClosed sSource mMaterial 

24. Given the critical role intelligence plays in countering terrorist threats, key information 

supporting the designation of an individual or entity under terrorist asset freezing measures may often be 

intelligence sourced. 

25. On the basis of their respective legal systems, jurisdictions should consider strengthening legal 

authorities and mechanisms to permit the use and sharing of intelligence material in building each case for 

designation, taking into account the necessity to implement or maintain the designation, or to provide 

sufficient evidence before a court in case such a designation should be challenged. 

 

4

 Relevant identifier information may include, but is not limited to: alternate names and spelling, date of 

birth, place of birth, address, nationality, and identification or passport numbers. 

5

 The reasonableness evidentiary standard for designation pursuant to SR III is important in meeting the 

preventive intent of targeted financial sanctions. 
FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 8

26. In relation to foreign designation requests, these mechanisms should be designed to enable a 

requesting country to provide the requested jurisdiction with as much information as possible to assist the 

requested jurisdiction in satisfying its own evidentiary standards for designation. 

27. Subject to domestic law enforcement and security sensitive considerations, jurisdictions should 

also consider putting in place measures to strengthen the use of intelligence material in court where 

necessary to defend designation decisions and to adequately protect sensitive information. 

28. These mechanisms should respect the rights of a designated individual or entity according to 

domestic and international law. 

II. Due Process: rReview, dDe-listing and uUnfreezing 

A Notice of designation 

29. All reasonable efforts should be made, by the designating state and (where appropriate or 

practicable) the state of residence, as soon as possible after the designation has taken effect, to inform 

designated individuals and entities directly of: 

a) The designation and its implications, in order to prevent any unintentional breaches on the part of 

themselves or related third parties. 

b) The review procedure and information on the de-listing process. 

c) Publicly-releasable information concerning the reasons for designation. 

d) Procedures to allow licensed access to funds (building on the model provided for in relation to 

designations under UNSCR 1267, as urged by the Security Council in UNSCR 1452) for basic 

expenses as soon as possible. 

30. Similarly, efforts should be made to inform individuals and entities designated by the UN AlQaieda and Taliban Sanctions Committee under UNSCR 1267 of the existence of a focal point in the 

United Nations Secretariat to facilitate applications for de-listing under UNSCR 1267. 

B Review of designation, delisting and unfreezing 

1. Availability of, and timely procedure for, review of both national and supranational designations 

31. Jurisdictions should have appropriate legal authorities and procedures to consider de-listing and 

unfreezing requests, where applicable, under UNSCR 1373 based upon satisfaction of certain criteria 

consistent with international obligations and applicable legal principles. 

32. To ensure procedural fairness, jurisdictions should make provision for any individual or entity to 

apply for a review of the designation from the designating authority, with the ability to seek further review 

of an adverse finding by the designating authority, to a review body, consistent with the jurisdiction’s 

general principles of law. 

33. The designating authority and the relevant designated individual or entity should be entitled to 

make submissions to the review body. In accordance with the fundamental principles of the jurisdiction’s 

legal system, hearings may be in public or private at the discretion of the review body, after hearing any 

submissions on this matter which the parties may wish to present. 
 FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 9

34. Final decisions of the review body should be public, but the review body should have the ability 

to exclude from its publicised findings, at its own motion or at the motion of the designating authority or 

applicant for review, any aspects of the decision which might raise significant privacy or security concerns. 

Such exclusions should take into account the rights of a designated individual or entity under domestic law 

and domestic laws and policies relating to transparency in decision making. 

35. Publication of the review body decisions would allow a body of jurisprudence to be developed 

which would, in turn, help promote better primary decision making with a view to reducing the need for 

review of those decisions. Publication could also be a means of drawing the private sector’s attention to 

changes or updates to the list of designated individuals and entities consequent upon review decisions. 

36. A designated individual or entity should also be able to apply again for review on a periodic 

basis if their initial applications are unsuccessful. 

37. Jurisdictions should consider implementing procedures for the periodic review of designations 

based upon new information that has come to light regarding a designation or an application for review by 

a state affected by the designation. 

2. Timely procedure for facilitating review of UNSC designations under UNSCR 1267 and 

successor resolutions 

38. For persons and entities designated under UNSCR 1267, jurisdictions should have appropriate 

procedures to facilitate review in accordance with any applicable guidelines or procedures adopted by the 

Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctions Committee, including those of the Focal Point mechanism established 

under UNSCR 1730. 

3. Delisting and unfreezing under UNSCR 1373 and UNSCR 1267 and successor resolutions 

39. For persons and entities designated under UNSCR 1373, jurisdictions should have appropriate 

legal authorities and procedures to delist, unfreeze the assets of, and remove the terms of sanctions against 

those parties that have for example credibly disassociated with the conditions and circumstances leading to 

their designation and / or no longer meet the criteria for designation. 

40. For those persons and entities designated under UNSCR 1267 and successor resolutions, 

jurisdictions should have appropriate legal authorities and procedures to unfreeze the assets of and remove 

the terms of sanctions against those parties that have been delisted by the UN Al-Qaieda and Taliban 

Sanctions Committee. 

41. For persons or entities with the same or similar name as designated persons, who are 

inadvertently affected by a freezing mechanism, jurisdictions should develop and implement publicly 

known procedures to remedy the situation of such persons or entities in a timely manner upon verification 

that the person or entity involved is not a designated person. 

III. Post-designation issues: Freezing and prohibiting dealing in funds or other assets of 

designated persons and entities 

A Scope of funds or other assets that are subject to freezing action 

42. The obligation expressed in UNSCR 1373 and UNSCR 1267, and the requirements of SR III to 

freeze funds or other assets is defined in the INSR III to cover financial assets, property of every kind, 

whether tangible or intangible, movable or immovable, however acquired, and legal documents or 

instruments in any form, including electronic or digital, evidencing title to, or interest in, such funds or 
FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 10

other assets, including, but not limited to, bank credits, travellers cheques, bank cheques, money orders, 

shares, securities, bonds, drafts, or letters of credit, and any interest, dividends or other income on or value 

accruing from or generated by such funds or other assets. 

43. The scope of funds and other assets referred to is defined by the individuals and entities which 

own or control them, not by any particular connection between the funds and other assets and terrorism or 

a particular terrorist act. An asset freezing mechanism should that applyies only to thea limited range of 

funds and other assets described in paragraph 7(d) of the INSR III owned or controlled by designated 

individuals and entities is not compliant with SR III. 

44. Jurisdictions should ensure that, if their asset freezing mechanism is set up in a way that links the 

ability to freeze to a definition of terrorism or terrorist financing in domestic criminal legislation, such 

definitions are broad enough to cover a freeze of all of the assets of any person or entity designated under 

UNSCR 1267 and UNSCR 1373. 

45. Jurisdictions should take appropriate action to ensure that government authorities maintaining 

registries of title to specific types of property, or responsible for the disbursement of funds or other assets, 

are aware of the asset freezing action and take appropriate measures to implement the obligation according 

to the law of the jurisdictions. 

B Freezing assets “without delay” on designation 

46. Once a decision is taken by the competent authority to designate an individual or entity, the 

application of the asset freezing mechanism to the designated individual, entity or asset should be 

simultaneous with the publication of the competent authority’s decision. This should be the case 

irrespective of whether the designation was made by a jurisdiction on its own motion or upon acceptance 

of a designation request from another jurisdiction. 

47. In accordance with INSR III, the phrase “without delay”, for the purposes of UNSCR 1267, 

means, ideally, within a matter of hours of a designation by the Al-Qaida and Taliban Sanctionis1267

Committee. 

C Communication strategy 

48. Whilst the private sector is legally required by relevant implementing legislation to comply with 

asset freeze obligations, jurisdictions need to be aware of the impact compliance with these laws has on 

their business activities, and seek to minimise the costs of compliance as far as possible. 

49. Requirements should be clearly articulated to the private sector. This should include not just 

financial institutionsthe banking sector, but also Designated Non Financial Businesses and Professions 

(DNFBPs) and high risk sectors that may not have had as much exposure to asset freeze measures, such as 

non-profit organizations (NPOs). 

50. Effective implementation of the asset freeze obligation requires an efficient and effective 

communication strategy. 

1. Targeting the Strategy 

51. The asset freeze obligations in UNSCR 1373 and UNSCR 1267 apply, through relevant 

implementing legislation, to all natural and legal persons in the jurisdiction. The communication strategy 

should therefore incorporate efficient and effective methods for informing the private sector and general 

public of their obligations under the asset freezing mechanism. 
 FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 11

52. The communication strategy should provide clear guidance to entities likely to hold targeted 

funds or other assets, which include, but go beyond, financial institutionsthe banking sector. 

53. In particular, the strategy should incorporate efficient and effective methods for informing highrisk sectors and DNFBPs of their obligations under the asset freezing mechanism. 

54. Finally, the strategy may include senior level engagement with appropriate bodies representing 

business, industry and high risk sectors, as well as more informal engagement with individual institutions 

and sectors. 

2. Content of the Message 

55. The communication strategy should ensure the timely and broad public dissemination of: 

a) The existence of the asset freezing restrictions and the obligations they impose on the private 

sector within the jurisdiction (to identify, freeze / block, and report relevant funds or other assets, 

to subsequently prohibit unlicensed dealings with designated parties and to continue to check for 

transactions relating to the designated person or entity and the actions to be taken if funds or 

other assets or suspect transactions are discovered). 

b) The importance of complying with the asset freezing obligations (emphasising both the potential 

criminal and civil liabilities for non-compliance, as well as the reputational risks for financial 

institutions of being seen to be in breach). 

c) Information identifying all individuals and entities subject to the asset freezing mechanism (all 

current designation information under UNSCR 1373 as well as UNSCR 1267), through 

publication of a comprehensive list of all such individuals and entities. 

d) Actions taken under asset freezing mechanisms. The legal notice of a designation decision (both 

new designations and revocations) should be considered the first stage of this communication 

strategy. 

e) Clear points of contact within the government to which the private sector can direct any 

enquiries, including a mechanism for the private sector to request, after conducting appropriate 

due diligence, guidance on possible matches to designated entities and individuals. 

3. Means for conveying the message 

56. Jurisdictions should consider maintaining a Government internet site including up-to-date and 

comprehensive information on: 

a) The designation procedure and asset freezing mechanism. 

b) Texts of relevant laws. 

c) Comprehensive list of all individuals and entities currently subject to the asset freezing 

mechanism. 
FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 12

d) The contact point for public inquiries. 

57. Jurisdictions should consider an electronic subscription service for persons and organizations 

with a particular need to be kept informed of decisions to designate or revoke a designation, such as the 

financial sector and high risk industries. 

D Post-freezing reporting and investigation 

1. Quality and utility of data 

58. Given the breadth of transactions covered by an asset freeze and the substantial number of 

entities subject to an asset freeze, the work involved for the private sector in ensuring they are compliant 

with an asset freeze is substantial. The more difficult it is to identify a person or entity from a sanctions 

list, the greater the burden on the private sector in ensuring compliance. This not only creates inefficiencies 

and lengthens the time it may take to detect breaches, but it will also reduce the goodwill of the private 

sector in implementing the measures. Just as poor quality identifiers increases the compliance burden on 

businesses, we should recognise that there will be a similar effect on law enforcement. 

59. Jurisdictions should therefore regularly review and update lists of persons and entities subject to 

asset freeze measures, to provide the most current and accurate identifiers on listed persons. Jurisdictions 

with additional identifying data for persons or entities listed under UNSCR 1267 should make that data 

available to the 1267 Committee for possible amendment of the Consolidated List. 

2. Reporting matches and deconflicting false positives 

60. Where jurisdictions’ asset freezing mechanisms require the reporting of possible matches, those 

making such reports should be encouraged to take reasonable measures to validate the accuracy of any 

matches to lists before reporting them to the relevant authority. In circumstances where the reporting 

entity does not meet the legal threshold to freeze the assets (and report to competent authorities), 

jurisdictions should requireencourage the reporting entity to submit a suspicious transaction report to the 

financial intelligence unit. 

61. Jurisdictions should assist the private sector in identifying false positives through publication of 

guidance on how to determine whether a potential match is an actual match and providing a clear point of 

contact to assist with deconflicting false positives. False positives are potential matches to listed persons, 

either due to the common nature of the name or due to ambiguous identifying data, which on examination 

prove not to be matches. 

3. Ensuring adequate compliance, controls, and reporting in the private sector 

62. Jurisdictions should work with the private sector in developing the following practices to: (a) 

facilitate co-operation and compliance by the private sector in identifying and freezing funds or other 

assets of designated persons, and (b) prevent designated persons from conducting financial or other 

transactions within their territories or through their financial institutions:.

a) Co-operate with the private sector generally and financial institutions in particular, especially 

those that are independently implementing programs to prevent potential terrorist financing 

activity or those that have come forward with potentially incriminating information, in 

investigating possible financial activity by a designated person; 
 FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 13

b) Ensure that financial institutions develop and maintain adequate internal controls (including due 

diligence procedures and training programs as appropriate) to identify the existing accounts, 

transactions, funds or other assets of designated persons; 

c) Ensure that financial institutions immediately freeze any identified funds or other assets held or 

controlled by designated persons; 

d) Ensure that financial institutions have the appropriate procedures and resources to meet there 

obligations under SR III; 

e) Ensure that financial institutions implement reasonable procedures to prevent designated persons 

from conducting transactions with, in or through them; 

f) Develop an effective monitoring system by a competent authority or a court with sufficient 

supervisory experience, authority and resources with a mandate to support the objectives set out 

in Paragraphs 62 (b), (c) and (d) above; 

g) Encourage, to the extent commercially reasonable, financial institutions to search or examine past 

financial activity by designated persons; 

h) Identify, assess compliance with, and improve as necessary client or customer identification rules 

used by financial institutions; 

i) Identify, assess compliance with, and improve as necessary record keeping requirements of 

financial institutions; 

j) Adopt reasonable measures to consider beneficial owners, signatories and power of attorney with 

respect to accounts or transactions held by financial institutions when searching for activity by 

designated persons, including any ongoing business relationships; and 

k) Harmonise counter-terrorist financing internal controls within each economic sector, as 

appropriate, with anti-money laundering programs. 

63. For each DNFBP, there should be mechanisms for monitoring and ensuring compliance with 

asset freezing mechanisms, for instance through assignment of responsibility to relevant competent 

authorities or to senior responsible owners. 

IV. Designated individuals and entities: compliance and access to frozen assets 

A Resident designated individuals and entities 

64. In order to comply with human rights requirements whilst still ensuring that the asset freeze is 

maintained, strong relationships and robust cross government processes should be built and maintained. 

There should be: 

a) Communication among competent authorities (including, where relevant, prosecution services or 

other appropriate judicial authorities) and other relevant authorities (such as the police service or 

intelligence agencies) to ensure comprehensive monitoring of compliance with the terms of the 

asset freeze. 
FATF/WGTM(2009)7/REV3 

 14

b) Co-ordination between competent authorities and social welfare departments supporting a 

resident designated individual and his / her family. 

B Clear domestic authorities and procedures to license the use of or dealing with frozen assets or 

the making of assets available to designated individuals or entities 

65. The asset freezing obligations under UNSCR 1267 provide for exemptions to be made to the 

asset freeze where necessary under specific circumstances. In UNSCR 1452, as amended by Resolution 

1735, the Security Council urged Member States to take full account of these considerations also in their 

implementation of UNSCR 1373. 

66. Where assets have been frozen under the resolutions, a clear process should be in place to ensure 

that, where necessary, exemptions can be authorised or licensed in a prompt manner. Effective decision 

making procedures at the domestic level should be supported by effective procedures for obtaining 

agreement from the relevant UNSC committee where required. 

67. An authorisation regime needs to balance, for example: 

a) Realising the purpose for which the authorisation is granted (whether for basic expenses, 

extraordinary expenses, contractual payments or other authorisable grounds). 

b) Mitigating against the risks of authorised payments going to purposes other than those for which 

they were granted, including terrorist purposes. 

c) Minimising the burden on the financial sector. 

d) The operation of domestic law. 

68. This process needs to be carefully managed to ensure that its application is consistent, 

transparent, reasonable and proportionate, with a clear audit trail as to why an authorisation was made, and 

if any conditions are attached to the exemption, how they were decided upon. 

69. Jurisdictions should implement appropriate controls on the granting of authorisations to ensure 

that they are complied with, meet the terms of the specific exemption grounds under which they were 

granted, and do not result in diversion of funds for other, including terrorist, purposes.