Search results

This paper aims to examine whether from a factual standpoint, it is sufficiently reasonable to address the suppression of terrorist financing by analogy with money laundering.

The process of terrorist financing will be examined in regard to the funding requirements of terrorists and the methods and tools that terrorists use to raise, move and store their funds. The process of money laundering will be compared with terrorist financing. The role of money laundering in terrorist financing will be discussed. In the core part of this paper, the assumptions justifying the inclusion of anti-money laundering measures to terrorist financing will be challenged.

What terrorist financing and money laundering share in common is money. However, there are fundamental differences between them with regard to the sources of funds and the direction of financial flows. None of the elements –“accumulation” and “legitimization”– involved in money laundering are necessarily engaged in the process of terrorist financing. This questions the authenticity of the assumptions which underlie the adopted approach. It also requires further investigation on the effectiveness of the integrated counter-terrorist regime, which will not be covered by this paper.

This paper provides a comprehensive introduction for those dealing with the greater question of whether the terrorist financing can and should be tackled by anti-money laundering measures.

The purpose of this paper is to re‐discover the nature of the crime of terrorist financing in order to challenge the assumption which requires the criminalization of terrorist financing as a predicate crime to money laundering.

Illustrating the nature of the crime of terrorist financing and money laundering, the necessity of the criminalization of terrorist financing as an inchoate crime in accordance with the principles of Islamic criminal law will be examined.

While the criminalization of money laundering in Islam is based on the illegality of crimes already happened, impermissibility of terrorist financing needs to be forward‐looking, concentrating on the destination of the crime of terrorist financing. This requires criminalization of terrorist financing as an inchoate offence which is compatible with the principles of Islamic criminal law.

The paper provides new insight into the criminalization of terrorist financing.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the counter-terrorism financing regime provides a solid platform for a better understanding of who should be considered terrorists or what forms terrorism, terrorist acts and terrorist groups, the financing of which is the subject matter. In the absence of an internationally agreed definition of terrorism, the question which needs to be posed is whether there is a clear and common understanding of what constitutes terrorism, terrorist acts and terrorist groups, the financing of which needs to be stopped. That is, from a criminal law perspective, whether the Terrorist Financing Convention, as the backbone of the counter-terrorist financing regime, clarifies what types of conduct, by who, in what circumstances and when, against whom (targets or victims) and with what intention or motivation should be considered terrorism?

It will be explained how and why it has been difficult to reach an agreement on the definition of terrorism. The endeavour of the drafters of the Terrorist Financing Convention and others involved in countering terrorist financing to establish a general definition of terrorism will be examined.

The record of attempts to define the elements of terrorism proves that it is hardly possible to reach an agreement on a generic definition of terrorism because the concept of terrorism is elusive and subject to various understandings. Even the definition provided by the Terrorist Financing Convention, is not convincing.

With regard to the findings, this paper calls for further research on the legal consequences of the implementation of the terrorist financing-counter measures, while the scope of terrorism, terrorist acts and terrorist organizations have been left vague.

This paper aims to address the existing gap in the anti-money laundering/counter-financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) regime and explore the possibility and effectiveness of disentangling the nexus between the two concepts.

The approach undertaken is doctrinal legal research by employing rigorous analysis of the legal terms of terrorism financing and money laundering.

Upon analysis, the study confirms that the two concepts are distinct; there is a slight overlap in the methods of acquisition of funds for both terrorists and money laundering; however, the purpose and intention of the two are totally separate and therefore creates a need for singular approach in tackling the two concepts. Enhanced collaboration between states and increased financial technologies will aid in better tackling of the two menaces.

The research is limited to a desk review approach.

The study confirms the argument that the AML/CFT approach is ineffective in tackling money laundering and terrorism financing.

This paper delves into a deeper analysis of money laundering and terrorism financing and provides a nuanced understanding of the differences between the two terms.