Brussels, 19/09/2001 (Agence Europe) - The European Parliament and Council failed to reach an agreement on the directive concerning money laundering at the launch of the conciliation procedure between the two institutions, in Brussels on Tuesday. The two parties have six weeks to find common ground. On a Commission proposal, the parties agreed to set up a small group of experts to try to find an agreement. The parliamentarians and representatives of the Council acknowledged, during their meeting, that deadlock over laundering would be hard to defend within public opinion, following the terrorist attacks of last week. The issue will be raised at the informal EcoFin Council in Liege on Saturday, Council President Didier Reynders told the press on Wednesday.
Discussion is on an amendment to the 1991 directive on the "prevention of the use of financial systems for money laundering purposes", which broadens its field of application to all activities linked to organised crime, and extends the number of professions held to supply information to audit authorities in the framework of the fight against money laundering (like solicitors, auditors, accountants or casino managers). The point of dispute between Parliament and the Council relates to the exemption that lawyers could enjoy, introduced by the EP in the directive's recitals.
Mr. Reynders said that the Council was prepared to compromise on the other parliamentary amendments, but not on the issue of lawyers. These amendments include in the list of professions held to inform the audit authorities: sellers of luxury items, auctioneers, customs and finance officials, for example.
At Tuesday's meeting, Parliament's rapporteur, Germany's CDU Klaus Lehne, and his compatriot in the SPD, Willy Rothley, placed emphasis on lawyers being excluded from the directive, including for extra-judicial procedures. W. Rothley is said to have invoked professional secrecy and the respect of the rights of the defence to justify Parliament's stance. British Liberal-Democrat, Sarah Ludford is said to have backed the Council's common position. The Chair of the parliamentary delegation, British Conservative James Provan, is alleged to have acknowledged that Parliament's stance was a difficult one, in the sense that, in plenary, a majority of MEPs rejected an amendment that would have altered Article 6 of the directive totally excluding lawyers from its field of application.