Not Helping
Here is a small part of Australia’s Anti-Money Laundering Legislation (AML/CTF).
It would be better to have a machine involved in the development of the meaning of the legislation – specifically a machine that does not have the Four Pieces Limit. The limit imposes a severe limit on a human’s ability to handle complex text.
41 Reports of suspicious matters
suspicious matter reporting obligation
(1) A suspicious matter reporting obligation
arises for a reporting entity In relation to a person (the first person) if, at a
particular time (the relevant time):
(a) the reporting entity commences to provide, or
proposes to provide, a designated service to the first person; or
(b) both:
(i) the first person requests the reporting
entity to provide a designated service to the first person; and
(ii) the designated service is of a kind
ordinarily provided by the reporting entity; or
(c) both:
(i) the first person inquires of the reporting
entity whether the reporting entity would be willing or prepared to provide a
designated service to the first person; and
(ii) the designated service is of a kind
ordinarily provided by the reporting entity;
and any of the following conditions is satisfied:
(d) at the relevant time or a later time, the
reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that the first person is not
the person the first person claims to be;
(e) at the relevant time or a later time, the
reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that an agent of the first
person who deals with the reporting entity in relation to the provision or
prospective provision of the designated service is not the person the agent
claims to be;
(f) at the relevant time or a later time, the
reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that information that the
reporting entity has concerning the provision, or prospective provision, of the
service:
(i) may be relevant to investigation of, or
prosecution of a person for, an evasion, or an attempted evasion, of a taxation
law; or
(ii) may be relevant to investigation of, or
prosecution of a person for, an evasion, or an attempted evasion, of a law of a
State or Territory that deals with taxation; or
(iii) may be relevant to investigation of, or
prosecution of a person for, an offence against a law of the Commonwealth or of
a State or Territory; or
(iv) may be of assistance in the enforcement of
the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 or
regulations under that Act; or
(v) may be of assistance in the enforcement of a
law of a State or Territory that corresponds to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 or regulations under that Act;
(g) at the relevant time or a later time, the
reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that the provision, or
prospective provision, of the service is preparatory to the commission of an
offence covered by paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of the definition of
financing of terrorism in section 5;
(h) at the relevant time or a later time, the
reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that information that the
reporting entity has concerning the provision, or prospective provision, of the
service may be relevant to the investigation of, or prosecution of a person
for, an offence covered by paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of the definition of
financing of terrorism in section 5;
(i) at the relevant time or a later time, the
reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that the provision, or
prospective provision, of the service is preparatory to the commission of an
offence covered by paragraph (a) or (b) of the definition of
money laundering in section 5;
(j) at the relevant time or a later time, the
reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that information that the
reporting entity has concerning the provision, or prospective provision, of the
service may be relevant to the investigation of, or prosecution of a person
for, an offence covered by paragraph (a) or (b) of the definition of
money laundering in section 5.
Report
(2) If a suspicious matter reporting obligation arises for a reporting entity in relation to a person, the reporting entity must give the AUSTRAC CEO a report about the matter within: (a) if paragraph (1) (d), (e), (f), (i) or (j) applies - 3 Business Days after the day on which the reporting entity forms the relevant suspicion; or
(b) if paragraph (1) (g) or (h) applies - 24 hours after the time when the reporting entity forms the relevant suspicion.
It is written in a form which may benefit the writer, but
no-one else, and definitely not a machine. It separates information that would
usefully go together:
(g) at the relevant time or a later time, the reporting entity suspects on reasonable grounds that the provision, or prospective provision, of the service is preparatory to the commission of an offence covered by paragraph (a), (b) or (c) of the definition of financing of terrorism in section 5;
(b) if
paragraph (1) (g) or (h) applies - 24 hours after the time when the reporting
entity forms the relevant suspicion.
Is a bank which keeps its
employees so busy that they have no time to review potentially suspicious events
responsible for the lack of forming suspicions? The Act gives no advice on the
matter. The long list of potential offences suggests that considerable care is
needed – using fines to whip the banks into line is probably not the best way
to manage it.
It is mixing up things that
should be kept in separate streams – 24 hours, where there is a sense of
urgency (which only appears where the report is described), or three business days for less time-sensitive
matters.
We need to be clear here – for the first few releases, we will
be relying on people to ensure that all the information needed for the
legislation or specification is presented to the machine. This need will be
softened by the machine linking everything together, no matter how many pages
separate the pieces of information.
What we have done is bring a person’s unconscious analysing of text to the surface by using a machine, a machine that can also handle the dialects of specialists.
Comments
Post a Comment