WRITTEN QUESTION P-1069/01 by Harlem Désir (PSE) to the Commission. Infringement of Directive 91/308/EC on prevention of the use of the financial system for money laundering.
Date: 2001-03-26
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Luxembourg, application of EU law, banking system, financial legislation, law of banking, money laundering, recycling of capital

C 340 E/162

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

4.12.2001

Kionowski in three Language Development Companies? If not, will the Council seek information about the
National Security Council(cid:146)s attitude towards L & H(cid:146)s take-over of Dragon, in view of the possible impact
this attitude might have on the Sensus project?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-1064/01, E-1081/01 and E-1083/01

(16 July 2001)

The events mentioned in the three Questions E-1064/01, E-1081/01, E-1083/01 are not within the
competence of the Council of the European Union.

(2001/C 340 E/184)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1069/01

by Harlem DØsir (PSE) to the Commission

(26 March 2001)

Subject: Infringement of Directive 91/308/EC on prevention of the use of the financial system for money

laundering

What action does the Commission intend to take to investigate the facts presented in the book
(cid:145)RØvØlation$(cid:146), published by Les ArŁnes in March 2001 in France, on serious breaches of Community
legislation, in particular the June 1991 Directive 91/308/EC (1) on prevention of the use of the financial
system for the purpose of money laundering?

What action is the Commission going to take in view of that fact that a third-country company implicated
in the embezzlement of IMF funds in Russia, Menatep, would appear to have been able to open an
unpublished account at the Luxembourg-based clearing house Clearstream, as have other third-country
banking establishments, e.g. Banque Colombienne? It would appear that sums far in excess of the ceiling
indicated in Article 3 of Directive 91/308/EC have been transferred to Clearstream accounts from
establishments offering no guarantees, without raising suspicions, and that transfers have been made to
offshore centres regarded as uncooperative by the OECD.

(1) OJ L 166, 28.6.1991, p. 77.

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(2 May 2001)

The Commission is responsible for checking that Community directives are correctly incorporated into
national law by the Member States and correctly applied by national public authorities. However, it is up
to the national authorities in the Member States to check that national legislation implementing a directive
is correctly applied by individuals and firms.

Luxembourg has correctly incorporated into its national law Directive 91/308/EC of 10 June 1991 on
prevention of the use of the financial system, the purpose of money laundering and, as far as the
Commission is aware, the Luxembourg authorities are applying it extensively and correctly. They are
taking account, inter alia, of the requirements of combating corruption and consider this crime to underlie
money laundering. In particular, pending ratification of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD) Convention on combating corruption of foreign officials in international trans-
actions, they have taken the necessary steps to ensure that Luxembourg(cid:146)s financial system effectively
applies measures to combat such crime.

In these circumstances, the Commission has at present no reason to think that the Luxembourg authorities
are not taking tough action if, in the case cited by the Honourable Member, they consider it necessary to
conduct an in-depth investigation. However, in exercising its prerogatives, the Commission will not fail to
ensure that Community law is applied correctly and to take any measures that may be necessary for this
purpose.