On 20th July, Burgess Salmon published an article saying that, in the EU, the AEO scheme is available to any business which is involved in the international supply chain and which carries out customs related activities, irrespective of their size or of the volume or value of their international activities. It explains that the regime is based on internationally recognised standards which allow for traders who meet a range of criteria to work in close co-operation with customs authorities to take advantage of simplified customs procedures. The EU currently has mutually-recognised AEO programmes with Norway, Switzerland, Japan, Andorra, China and the US. In the EU (including the UK) one can apply for either AEOC status – which provides for simplified customs authorisations, procedures and either a reduction or waiver of guarantees for customs duties; or AEOS status – which provides for enhanced security and safety clearance. Whilst the take-up of AEO status in the UK has, to date, been less than elsewhere in Europe, the article says that as the number of AEO registrations increases, so will the pressure on other businesses to comply. There is a real risk that unregistered organisations will be dealt with as secondary concerns in the future.
This Order (SI 2018/871) makes provision in connection with the trade restrictions against Burma specified in Council Regulation (EU) 401/2013 and revokes and replaces the Export Control (Burma Sanctions) Order 2013. The Order deals with licences, information powers, offences and penalties in connection with the sanctions regime affecting Burma/Myanmar. It follows the new EU-wide trade restrictions set out in Council Regulation (EU) 2018/647 of April. This latest Regulation was adopted by the EU Council in response to widespread, systematic and grave human rights violations committed by the Burmese military and security forces and involved imposition of sanctions prohibiting the export to Burma of, amongst other things, dual-use goods, technology, software, and the provision of telecommunications, internet monitoring or interception services to Burma.
On 23rd July, EU Regulation 2018/1033/EU contained 2 amendments to the list – for the entries relating to Ayyub Bashir (aka Alhaj Qari Ayub Bashar and Qari Muhammad Ayub) and the Jemmah Anshorut Tauhid (JAT) (aka Jemaah Anshorut Tauhid, Jemmah Ansharut Tauhid, Jem’mah Ansharut Tauhid, Jamaah Ansharut Tauhid and Jama’ah Ansharut Tauhid). This followed the decision of the relevant UN Sanctions Committee on 17th July.
The Times of Malta on 23rd July reported the reaction of the FIAU (the country’s FIU) to the recent critical EBA report. The EBA took the FIAU to task over its failure to sanction Pilatus after preliminary findings by the agency raised concerns about the bank’s lack of compliance with AML laws. A FIAU spokesman maintained that neither the unit nor the EBA had sufficient information to confirm that Pilatus Bank had breached its AML obligations, and it provided more detail of its interaction with the bank. In its visit reports the FIAU had apparently said the bank was turning a “blind eye” to AML procedures for certain PEP, but a spokesman said that that the lack of documentation about the source of wealth and source of funds regarding some of its clients formed the basis of “most of the concerns” expressed in the initial report and that the “missing” documentation was present during the follow-up visit [perhaps suggesting more of a concern over procedural issues, and the paperwork being seen to be correct, than the actual risks the bank presented, or might present and the need for a closer or more in-depth inquiry?].