MEPs adopted a resolution on Thursday 14 March stressing the urgent need to establish a European blacklist of third countries at high risk of money laundering. They thus strongly support the European Commission's approach to the list of 23 third countries it presented on 13 February (see EUROPE 12193/28).
In their resolution, MEPs bitterly regret the EU Council's objection to the list (see EUROPE 12209/12) and ask the Commission to propose a new delegated act “as soon as possible”.
“After each terrorist attack, we hear passionate speeches about how we have to effectively fight against terrorists. After each banking scandal, we hear a lot of other speeches that we have toed to make our financial sector healthier”, said the European Commissioner for Justice, Věra Jourová, during the debate preceding the vote on Tuesday.
To the applause of MEPs, she lamented that, because of the EU Council's decision, the EU could not move from words to action. However, the Commissioner is not giving up and has confirmed her intention to present a new list before the end of her mandate (see EUROPE 12210/24).
The Romanian Presidency of the Council of the EU has shared this sense of urgency with the European Parliament and the Commission. “This decision to object does not mean that the list is not an important element of the ongoing work. On the contrary. But to achieve the full impact of this instrument and to ensure its quality, we need to introduce the list in an orderly process”, explained Melania-Gabriela Ciot, Romania's Secretary of State for European Affairs.
For MEPs, lobbying and diplomatic pressure from the countries on the list - Saudi Arabia and Panama - have been and will continue to be an integral part of the census process. However, this pressure must not affect the EU's ability to fight money laundering and the EU-linked financing of terrorism in an effective and autonomous way, they warn in their resolution.
Ana Gomes (S&D, Portugal) also lamented that the EU Council had failed to rise to the challenge and that governments were prisoners of “perverse economic interests”. For Jeppe Kofod (S&D, Denmark), this decision to object is a "disaster" and a "scandal".
Sven Giegold (Greens/EFA, Germany) even asserted that the justifications invoked by the EU Council in terms of method were a “farce” and called on the Commission not to give in. “We certainly do not need a short list where some problematic states have been removed, but, on the contrary, an expanded list”, he said.
In their resolution, MEPs also called on the Commission to publish its assessments of the countries on the list in order to ensure public scrutiny and to prevent any wrongdoing. They also asked it to engage in a dialogue with Member States in order to encourage the EU Council to take greater ownership of the proposed method.
The big one missing from the list: Russia
While MEPs have given their support to the Commission, they do not believe that the list is perfect. The absence of Russia did not escape them, of course. In their resolution, they point out that Russia's assessment is still ongoing and ask the Commission to include in its assessment the latest findings on the “lavomatic Troika”.
Finland's Nils Torvalds (ALDE) was particularly surprised to see that this problem was not “taken seriously” when, in a very large number of financial scandals, the common thread is, in his view, always Russia. (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)