Verbatim report of proceedings

Wednesday, 12 February 2020 - Strasbourg

21. State of play of the EU's fight against money laundering, in light of the Luanda Leaks (debate)

  President. – The next item is the debate on the Council and Commission statements on the state of play of the EU’s fight against money laundering, in light of the Luanda Leaks (2020/2562(RSP)).

I remind you that it is possible to request catch-the-eye and blue cards using both the standard registration and the electronic system. Instructions are available at the entrance of the Hemicycle. Please be reminded that blue-card questions can be raised only after the speeches on behalf of the political groups.

  Nikolina Brnjac, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, thank you for inviting the Presidency to contribute to this debate.

Let me start by assuring you that the Council, like the Parliament and the Commission, is fully committed to the fight against money laundering and terrorism financing. Together, we have made substantial progress in this area, including with amendments to the Anti-Money Laundering Directive and the Banking Package, the European Banking Authority Regulation and in the Criminal Law Framework.

All these recent rules now need to be implemented and enforced. The speculations raised by the Luanda Leaks case are indeed alarming and damaging if confirmed. Damaging not only to the country in question, which may have been deprived of essential revenues, but also for EU banks if it turns out that not all applicable rules were followed. I understand that related investigations are being undertaken, including in Angola and Portugal, which now need to follow their course.

Last July, the Commission published, at the request of the Council, a post—mortem review of alleged money—laundering cases involving EU banks. In that report, the Commission identified concrete problems with the supervision and enforcement of any anti-money laundering rules across the European Union. And I think it is not excluded that we may now see some of these same issues repeated if, in fact, confirmed.

Looking ahead, however, in spite of the challenges and setbacks, there are also causes for more optimism. Indeed, there is a sense of urgency shared by Parliament, the Commission and the Council, and more than that, I would say that there is also a shared sense of ambition in tackling the big problem that is money laundering.

This brings me to the strategic conclusions that the Council adopted last December. In these conclusions, the Council advised the Commission to look into ways to increase harmonisation in the anti-money laundering area, as well as to consider the possibilities, advantages and disadvantages of establishing an EU supervisory body.

The Council is advising on other fronts as well. For one, we still have the Anti-Money Laundering Action Plan, agreed by Ecofin in December 2018, which is running its course and which we continue to monitor.

Additionally, our Presidency has started a broader discussion on fighting serious and organised crime by tracing its proceeds more effectively.

We stand at an important crossroads from where we have the opportunity to proceed towards an effective regime to counter money laundering and the financing of terrorism. In this sense, I very much look forward to the Commission’s upcoming initiatives and proposals and I trust that the Commission will take on board any lessons learned in this last case, the Luanda Leaks, as appropriate.

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, the Commission recognises the importance of this debate and welcomes the opportunity to clarify its approach to matters such as those revealed to be at the heart of the Luanda Leaks. We have consistently stressed that better enforcement of anti-money laundering rules across Europe and stronger supervision are essential to increase the resilience of our financial system.

Beyond stability, we need to ensure the integrity of our financial system. It is not a problem of one country. The European Union should have zero tolerance for dirty money. We are willing to apply all of the tools at our disposal and to the fullest capacity. Moreover, we are ready to strengthen them. We will not hesitate to propose changes to the legislative and institutional architecture that supports our fight against money laundering, terrorist financing, as well as tax evasion and avoidance.

Following up on the European Parliament’s resolution and the Ecofin conclusions of December, the Commission will adopt a new action plan on anti-money laundering that will seek to improve the enforcement of the rules.

Much has been done in recent years. The fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive, which should have been transposed by Member States by 10 January, allows greater scrutiny of information around beneficial ownership by civil society, including by the press or civil society organisations and contributing to preserving trust in the integrity of business transactions and of the financial system. The legal framework currently in force seeks to ensure a proper balance between the need to ensure protection of privacy and of personal data and the need for more transparency in financial and economic activities. By establishing accessible registers of beneficial ownership information, the Union has achieved the gold standard worldwide in this respect.

Regrettably, not all the Member States have transposed the fifth Anti-Money Laundering Directive. Today, the Commission has started infringement procedures against eight Member States which are signalling a complete lack of transposition. However, our real problem is not a lack of rules; it is that the enforcement of rules is done at national level and is uneven from country to country. Recent legislative changes to the mandate of the European supervisory authorities granted new powers to the European Banking Authority to lead, coordinate and monitor the EU Supervisor’s fight against money laundering and terrorist financing. This covers the entire financial sector.

The Commission, however, acknowledges that more must be done. There is a need to address structural weaknesses linked to regulatory fragmentation among Member States. This is where European added value lies. The Commission intends to work towards the establishment of a unified, comprehensive anti-money laundering policy, building on existing rules and introducing all necessary improvements. There is scope for harmonising the existing rules. There is need for more information sharing between law enforcement authorities to detect and prosecute criminals and to recover assets. In addition to a more detailed and harmonised set of rules based on regulations rather than on directives, a greater role for the EU in overseeing their implementation is justified. This applies as regards both supervision and coordination of the Financial Intelligence Units.

An EU supervisory body for AML is a must-have, but creating a structure should not be our aim in itself. The body, be it a new one or building on the existing one, has to have a clearly-defined scope, powers and, very importantly, efficient governance. We know that we can count on the support of the European Parliament to bring about a revamped and more efficient supervisory and enforcement architecture. This is our ambition.

  Markus Ferber, im Namen der PPE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident, Frau Kommissarin, Frau Ratspräsidentin, liebe Kolleginnen, liebe Kollegen! Die Luanda Leaks zeigen einmal mehr, dass die Europäische Union trotz mittlerweile fünf Anti-Geldwäscherichtlinien nach wie vor erschreckend attraktiv für Geldwäscher ist. Wir müssen uns schon mit der Frage beschäftigen, warum das nach wie vor der Fall ist. Natürlich ist ein großes Problem die schleppende Umsetzung des geltenden Rechts. Frau Kommissarin, ich kann Ihnen da nur zustimmen.

Die Umsetzungsfrist für die fünfte Richtlinie war vor wenigen Tagen, am 10. Januar. Zu diesem Zeitpunkt haben ganze fünf – fünf! – von siebenundzwanzig Mitgliedstaaten die Richtlinie vollumfänglich umgesetzt, fünfzehn nur teilweise – Frau Ratspräsidentin, auch wenn Sie nicht zuhören, Ihr Land gehört zu diesen fünfzehn –, und der Rest hat die Kommission noch nicht mal über die Umsetzung informiert. Ich begrüße es sehr, dass Sie heute ein Vertragsverletzungsverfahren gegen diese Mitgliedstaaten eröffnet haben. Wenn das aber die Art und Weise ist, wie die Mitgliedstaaten in der Praxis gegen Geldwäsche vorgehen, dann sind all die schönen Entschließungen der EU-Finanzminister doch nur Lippenbekenntnisse. Da die Mitgliedstaaten offenbar nicht in der Lage oder willens sind – und jetzt auch nicht zuhören –, effektiv gegen Geldwäsche vorzugehen, müssen wir schon darüber nachdenken, wie wir das Problem auf europäischer Ebene bekämpfen können.

Thank you very much, President, that you are listening now again.

Immerhin geht es hier um die Integrität des europäischen Finanzsystems und auch um die Sicherheit unserer Bürgerinnen und Bürger, denn Geldwäsche und organisierte Kriminalität sind unmittelbar miteinander verknüpft. Wir haben mit der Europäischen Staatsanwaltschaft ein Modell dafür, wie man eine Behörde aufbauen kann, die auch eine europäische Perspektive in strafrechtlichen Fragen einnehmen kann. Und deswegen fordere ich die Mitgliedstaaten wirklich auf, hier mitzuarbeiten, dass wir zu europäischen Verfolgungsbehörden kommen, damit wir dieses Problem dauerhaft in den Griff bekommen. Immer darauf zu warten, bis das letzte EU-Land alles umgesetzt hat, wird nicht ausreichen.

  Eero Heinäluoma, S&D-ryhmän puolesta. – Arvoisa puhemies, olemme jälleen kiitoksen velkaa toimittajille, riippumattomille journalisteille, jotka ovat tehneet arvokkaita paljastuksia kertoessaan, miten todellisuudessa raha liikkuu ja vastoin niitä sääntöjä, jotka meillä on. Erityisen järkyttävää on, että tämä tapahtuu maassa, jossa kolmasosa kansalaisista elää alle kahden dollarin päivätuloilla. Satoja miljoonia, miljardeja on viety maasta pois, ja monet eurooppalaiset konsultit, asianajajat ja lakimiehet ovat avustaneet tässä – jopa viranomaisia on ollut mukana tukemassa tätä toimintaa.

Ryhmämme on pitkään vaatinut pelisääntöjen tiukentamista, todellista muutosta. Nyt on aihetta sanoa, että tuskin selviämme enää näillä direktiiveillä, joita kansallisesti toimeenpannaan vaihtelevalla tavalla. Tarvitsemme yhtenäistä lainsäädäntöä, ja tähän meitä kehottaa myös finanssimaailma itse. Tämä on myös pankkien toivomus. Joten on muutoksen aika, ja se vaatii myös parempaa valvontaa eurooppalaisella tasolla.

  Ramona Strugariu, în numele grupului Renew. – Domnule președinte, nu transpunem complet, corect și la timp directivele europene adoptate pentru combaterea eficientă a spălării de bani. Este o realitate!

Comisia a început astăzi procedurile de infringement împotriva mai multor state, inclusiv împotriva României pentru că nu a transpus la timp Directiva a cincea. Mai mult decât atât, niciunul dintre statele membre nu a transpus corect și complet cea de-a patra Directivă, pentru care termenul de transpunere era luna iunie 2017.

Sunt câteva linii de acțiune clare care se desprind, în special, în lumina ultimelor dezvăluiri din scandalul Luanda Leaks. În primul rând, avem nevoie, doamna comisar, de regulamente pentru combaterea spălării de bani. Este o abordare curajoasă, dar absolut necesară. Directivele nu sunt un instrument suficient de puternic. Trebuie schimbată paradigma.

Apoi trebuie să cunoaștem cu adevărat beneficiarii reali. Transparența este un exercițiu absolut obligatoriu în tot acest proces.

Lacunele legislative creează situații de mare vulnerabilitate pentru Uniune și pentru statele membre. Este inacceptabil ca una din cele patru mari firme de consultanță europene, care lucrează inclusiv cu instituțiile Uniunii, să ofere consultanță financiară și legală rudelor și camarilei dictatorilor din state terțe pentru a-i ajuta să spele bani, să-și transfere activele în paradisuri fiscale și să evazioneze bugetele statelor în care operează. Răspunsul este legislație Magnitsky, orizontal, la nivel european, așa cum am cerut inclusiv prin scrisoarea trimisă Comisiei în luna decembrie.

Nu în ultimul rând, trebuie subliniat că jurnaliștii de investigație ne-au demonstrat din nou, prin dezvăluirile din Luanda Leaks, cât de importantă este munca lor pentru lupta împotriva spălării banilor și a corupției. Protecția lor, inclusiv legislativ, trebuie să fie o prioritate absolută a Comisiei și a noastră.

  Sven Giegold, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Herr Präsident! Wenn ich mir die öffentliche Debatte nach den Enthüllungen von Luanda Leaks anschaue, dann beschleicht mich wirklich ein ungutes Gefühl. Es scheint mir so, als ob wir uns an solche Steuerskandale langsam gewöhnen. Die Aufregung nimmt ab, es scheint für die Öffentlichkeit, dass die Politik machtlos ist gegenüber einer immer weiter große Geschäfte machenden Steuervermeidungsindustrie für einige Reiche und Mächtige. Aber Politik darf niemals aufhören, gegen Unrecht und gegen Ungerechtigkeit anzugehen, um unserer Demokratie willen, egal wie mächtig die Gegner sind.

Es ist kein Zufall, dass wir es bei Luanda Leaks wieder mit unserem Mitgliedstaat Portugal zu tun haben. Schon bei den Football Leaks vor einem Jahr stand Portugal im Zentrum eines Korruptionsskandals – und was ist daraus gefolgt? Der Whistleblower, Rui Pinto, sitzt im Gefängnis, aber die wahren Verbrecher wurden nicht verfolgt. Genauso hat Portugal in großem Maße Tausende von golden visa verkauft und in Madeira eine Steueroase aufgebaut. So tritt man das Rechtsempfinden der Menschen mit Füßen, und das können wir als europäische Rechtsgemeinschaft nicht zulassen. Die EU-Kommission muss das europäische Recht in allen Mitgliedstaaten durchsetzen, und sie darf mit Vertragsverletzungsverfahren nicht warten. Sie hat diesem Treiben in Portugal leider auch viel zu lange zugesehen, während eben gleichzeitig große Skandale am Laufen waren – Geld nicht eingezogen wurde, Täter nicht verurteilt wurden.

Wir haben daher ein Rechtsstaatlichkeitsproblem in Portugal, und die EU-Kommission muss sich dieses Problems schleunigst mit gezielten Vertragsverletzungsverfahren annehmen. Die kommende Revision der Wirtschaftsprüferrichtlinie brauchen wir, um dafür zu sorgen, dass gerade Wirtschaftsprüfer in Zukunft mit schmutzigem Geld keine Geschäfte mehr machen können, so wie es in den Luanda Leaks leider wieder aufgedeckt wurde. Dieses Problem ist noch lange nicht gelöst, wir müssen da dranbleiben.

  Beata Kempa, w imieniu grupy ECR – Panie Przewodniczący! Tylko twarde prawo, którego przekroczenie zagrożone jest nieuchronną karą, jest w stanie powstrzymać międzynarodowe grupy przestępcze. Pozwólcie Państwo, że posłużę się polskim przykładem wprowadzenia takich reguł. W ostatnich latach pod wodzą prokuratora generalnego Zbigniewa Ziobry Polska wytoczyła ciężkie działa przeciw praniu brudnych pieniędzy. Dzięki konfiskacie rozszerzonej i uszczelnieniu systemu udało się przejąć i zabezpieczyć w krótkim czasie około 4 miliardów złotych, czyli około miliarda euro. Na polski sukces składa się bezwzględność, odwaga, upór prokuratury i Ministerstwa Sprawiedliwości oraz wprowadzenie nowych środków walki z praniem brudnych pieniędzy. Konfiskata rozszerzona, wzmocniona kooperacja w ramach podmiotów międzynarodowych i banków, ograniczenia wobec rajów podatkowych i tzw. podmiotów niechętnych współpracy oraz szybko i bezwzględnie działające służby – to najważniejsze elementy nowej architektury walki ze zorganizowaną przestępczością i praniem brudnych pieniędzy. Istotnym narzędziem staje się wprowadzana, piąta już, dyrektywa w sprawie zwalczania brudnych pieniędzy. To kolejne ważne usprawnienie systemu i wzmocnienie kooperacji w walce z najcięższą przestępczością.

  José Gusmão, em nome do Grupo GUE/NGL. – Senhor Presidente, o escândalo dos Luanda Leaks tem, certamente, muitas responsabilidades nacionais, também no meu país, onde, durante muitos anos, a elite económica e a elite política não viu nenhum problema nos negócios de Isabel dos Santos, e colaborou com eles. E tem, também, problemas nacionais noutras jurisdições como a de Malta, que colaborou ativamente com todo o ciclo da lavagem de dinheiro que foi acontecendo.

Agora, há uma responsabilidade também das instituições europeias em perceber que, se há jurisdições nacionais que estão a facilitar o branqueamento de capitais, a evasão fiscal, a criminalidade financeira, então os restantes membros da União Europeia, e a União Europeia como um todo, têm que impedir que isso aconteça.

E há o risco de a multiplicação destes escândalos terminar sem responsabilidades e sem consequências para todos os que colaboram na lavagem de dinheiro, sejam eles Estados, sejam eles as empresas de consultoria financeira que a Comissão Europeia contrata para trabalharem para instituições europeias e que estão também envolvidas nestas operações que sabem ser ilegais, e nas instituições financeiras da União Europeia. Se nada disto tem consequências, se no final deste processo a única pessoa que for responsabilizada for o Rui Pinto, que é a pessoa que trouxe estes documentos a público, então a única lição que os cidadãos irão retirar da atuação da União Europeia a é de que, nestes escândalos, só há consequências para aqueles que não cometeram crimes.

  Lídia Pereira (PPE). – Senhor Presidente, Senhoras e Senhores Deputados, o branqueamento de capitais é um crime com muitas faces. Tem legitimado fortunas e investimentos, aberto a porta à contaminação de empresas e à viciação da economia. No entanto, o dinheiro lavado não perde a sua origem criminosa. Combatê-lo é mais que um imperativo económico ou de supervisão, é uma questão de Estado de Direito e, não poucas vezes, de defesa dos direitos humanos. Exigem-se respostas determinadas e sólidas.

Hoje há possíveis processos de infração de Estados-Membros por falha na transposição da 5.ª Diretiva no combate ao branqueamento de capitais. Falta determinação e falta solidez, porque cada um dos vinte e sete tem a sua própria abordagem, como a Senhora Comissária bem disse na sua intervenção inicial.

É na divisão que se encontra a porta entreaberta para o crime. No final de março, a Comissão apresentará o seu plano de ação. Cabe a este Parlamento responder, com ainda maior determinação e solidez, nem que para isso diretivas tenham de passar a regulamentos, e nem que para isso tenhamos de reforçar a supervisão europeia e o Banco Central Europeu, quando os reguladores nacionais continuam a falhar.

  Caterina Chinnici (S&D). – Signor Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, le rivelazioni dei Luanda Leaks, che coinvolgono anche operatori di alcuni Stati membri, confermano che la lotta al riciclaggio deve rimanere fra le priorità dell'Unione europea.

Il riciclaggio, insieme a corruzione e frode, rappresenta infatti uno dei mezzi attraverso cui le organizzazioni criminali si radicano sul territorio e penetrano nell'economia ledendo la libertà economica e la libera concorrenza. Ed è il riciclaggio una delle fonti di finanziamento del terrorismo.

È necessario quindi rafforzare la normativa europea antiriciclaggio ed armonizzare le legislazioni nazionali. Ed è necessario monitorare l'attuazione delle direttive sulla lotta al riciclaggio, anche quella in materia penale. Occorre poi dare all'autorità giudiziaria ed investigativa pieno accesso alle informazioni raccolte dalle FIU e dotare le autorità di contrasto di efficaci poteri di controllo già sul piano amministrativo e di un'adeguata specializzazione, come avviene ad esempio nel mio paese, l'Italia, con la Guardia di Finanza. E tutto questo anche al fine di recuperare i proventi di tali gravi reati che oggi sappiamo avviene solo nella misura dell'1 %.

PRESIDENZA DELL'ON. FABIO MASSIMO CASTALDO
Vicepresidente

  Francisco Guerreiro (Verts/ALE). – Senhor Presidente, Luanda Leaks, este escândalo espelha bem como o sistema financeiro, económico e fiscal promove autênticas passadeiras vermelhas de lavagem de dinheiro, corrupção e tráfico de influências.

Veja-se o caso gritante e incompreensível do sistema de vistos Gold em Portugal. Em sete anos, este regime de vistos não só pressionou os preços da habitação, tornando-os incomportáveis para a maioria dos cidadãos, como foi um falhanço a nível económico, criando apenas duzentos e treze postos de trabalho e dezasseis empresas.

Mas mais, os dados que relacionam os vistos com a entrada de capitais duvidosos são tão evidentes que este próprio Parlamento já recomendou o fim dos vistos Gold em todos os Estados—Membros, recomendação essa a que Portugal fez, e faz, vista grossa.

Mas o Luanda Leaks faz também reabrir o tema da proteção dos denunciantes e a garantia da não interferência do sistema político no jornalismo de investigação. É urgente garantir a transposição da Diretiva de 2019, nomeadamente em Portugal, sobre a proteção de denunciantes e garantir que o jornalismo de investigação tem todas as ferramentas para exercer o seu trabalho de guardião da democracia.

  João Ferreira (GUE/NGL). – Senhor Presidente, escândalos fiscais como o Lux Leaks e outros revelaram ao mundo um sistema que promove a opacidade e o anonimato e que permite o branqueamento de capitais. Na reação a tais escândalos a União Europeia mostrou que continua fortemente condicionada pelos interesses das multinacionais e não só. Medidas tidas por elementares para lutar contra o branqueamento de capitais foram travadas e, se alguma coisa mudou, foi para que ficasse tudo na mesma.

Quanto a recentes alegações vindas a público, cabe às autoridades dos países envolvidos averiguar a existência de ilicitudes ou ilegalidades e agir em conformidade. Aquilo que estes acontecimentos não podem justificar, em nenhum caso, são atitudes hipócritas e de ingerência de quem aqui vê uma oportunidade para dar força às suas ambições de domínio neocolonial.

O combate ao branqueamento de capitais, assim como à evasão e elisão fiscais, continua limitado por um nó que a União Europeia não se mostra interessada em desatar: os paraísos fiscais com os quais a União Europeia convive e é conivente. Continua a ser necessário desatar este nó.

  Емил Радев (PPE). – Г-н Председател, уважаеми колеги, днес на ниво Европейски съюз сме въвели строги правила, залегнали в Четвъртата и Петата директива за борба с прането на пари и финансирането на тероризма, която трябваше да бъде транспонирана от държавите членки до 10 януари тази година.

Но Луандалийкс ясно показват, че не всички държави и банки в Европейския съюз все още са приложили тези правила. Обезпокоителен е фактът, че имаме силно регулиран сектор. Разполагаме с необходимите инструменти за разкриването на всяка потенциално рискова за пране на пари дейност, но въпреки това нищо не се е случило.

Виждаме, че през последните години заплахите не идват само отвън, а има фрапиращи случаи на пране на пари вътре в Европейския съюз. По този начин целият финансов пазар на Европейския съюз е изложен на заплаха от страна на престъпници и терористи. Луандалийкс са поредният пример за неприлагането на европейското законодателство и в частност механизмите за установяване на самоличността на клиентите, докладване на подозрителни транзакции, свързани с определени сметки и т.н.

В тази връзка Европейската комисия трябва да следи за правилното въвеждане и прилагане на съществуващата правна рамка, и ако е необходимо, да започне процедури за нарушения срещу държавите членки. Благодаря Ви!

  Pedro Marques (S&D). – Mr President, with this timely debate we go back to a recurrent concern of this Parliament. These practices harm the European society because relevant parts of our resources are directed to criminal activities. The scope of innovation in financial transactions is enormous. Digital transactions grow every day and become more and more sophisticated. We have to recognise that regulation in actual practices by the authorities have been insufficient. We need coherent regimes of supervision and on the actual definition of illegal practices. We need much more cooperation between the different authorities in Member States. We need to consider an additional role for the European authorities. We need compliance to step up in the institutions, even through the enforcement of public authorities. For all this to happen, we probably have to step up the legislative and regulatory process at European level, considering seriously the possibility of approving a European regulation. Finally, we need people to trust the banks, financial institutions, public authorities. Therefore, this battle is far from won. Let’s keep fighting the good fight.

  David Casa (PPE). – Il-ħasil tal-flus jibqa’ delitt diffiċli biex jiġi skopert u aktar diffiċli biex min jaħsel il-flus, jitressaq il-qorti.

Ġurisdizzjonijiet sigrieti jagħmlu minn kollox biex jiffaċilitaw l-attività kriminali. Informazzjoni kruċjali għall-prosekuzzjonijiet mhux qed tingħadda lil min jinvestiga u dan kollu qed iwassal biex il-kriminali jgawdu minn impunità.

Naturalment il-ġurnalista Ewropea Daphne Caruana Galizia nqatlet biex ma tibqax tikxef il-korruzzjoni u l-ħasil tal-flus; l-istess korruzzjoni u ħasil tal-flus li saru minn kumpanija rreġistrata fid-Dubai. Minkejja dan kollu, l-Emirati Għarab Magħquda jibqgħu jinsistu li ma jgħaddux informazzjoni importanti, li jfisser li l-ġustizzja ma tistax isseħħ.

Għandu jkollna qafas f’postu biex dan it-tip ta’ informazzjoni tkun tista’ tingħadda kif suppost, anke bejn l-FIAUs fl-Ewropa. Irridu nkunu b’saħħitna biex nassiguraw li pajjiżi terzi jikkooperaw ma’ investigazzjonijiet Ewropej dwar il-ħasil tal-flus.

Fl-aħħar mill-aħħar, irid ikun hemm konsegwenzi għall-ġurisdizzjonijiet li ma jikkooperawx. Ma jistax ikollna din is-sitwazzjoni u nħalluha għaddejja kif inhi.

  Paul Tang (S&D). – Mr President, she took EUR 2 billion from the Angolan people, bought companies at a great discount, and got loans she never repaid. How did Isabel dos Santos become Africa’s richest woman? Many say it’s corruption, but we only seek money that we can spend, and she did her spending here. Her EUR 50 million superyacht was Dutch; her GBP 30 million mansion is in London. The real enablers of her crimes are those who cleaned her money: bankers from Liechtenstein, tax advisers from Luxembourg, and trust firms in Amsterdam, my hometown.

These enablers roam free, while Rui Pinto, the source behind the Luanda Leaks and the Football Leaks, has already been in prison for one whole year. Is he not a whistle—blower? Doesn’t he deserve protection? These are my specific questions to the European Commission.

We need to acknowledge the problem. We need to acknowledge that the problem is also ours, and to protect those that expose these crimes. So let’s fight money laundering. Let’s gather our resources, European and national. Let’s fight.

  Othmar Karas (PPE). – Herr Präsident, meine sehr geehrten Damen und Herren! 2 000 Milliarden Euro werden pro Jahr auf der Welt gewaschen. Aber wir brauchen nicht nur auf andere zu sehen; das Problem beginnt nicht außerhalb der Europäischen Union. 110 Milliarden Euro werden innerhalb der Europäischen Union gewaschen – das kommt dem jährlichen EU-Haushalt schon sehr nahe. Es ist daher eine Frage der Glaubwürdigkeit der Rechtsgemeinschaft, es ist eine Frage der Glaubwürdigkeit der europäischen parlamentarischen Demokratie. Es ist haarsträubend, dass es noch immer einen Widerspruch zwischen den eingegangenen Verpflichtungen und deren Umsetzung durch die Mitgliedstaaten gibt; dass es noch immer die Situation gibt, dass die vierte Geldwäscherichtlinie nicht umgesetzt ist, obwohl die fünfte seit Jänner bereits umgesetzt hätte werden sollen; und dass es noch immer einen durchlässigen Fleckerlteppich gibt und wir noch immer eine gemeinsame Geldwäscheaufsicht benötigen, die über den Finanzsektor hinausgeht, eine europäische Finanzpolizei und eine europäische Meldestelle. Machen wir endlich das, was wir seit Jahren versprechen.

  Marek Belka (S&D). – Mr President, after discussions connected to the Panama Papers, Paradise Papers, Luxleaks and you name it, here we are again with Luanda Leaks.

Getting into detailed discussions about Ms dos Santos’ potential wrongdoings makes little sense now. What we need to look at is own European plate.

Firstly, if Dubai is so often mentioned in the Luanda leaks as a destination country for illicit wealth, why are the United Arab Emirates not on our European blacklist of non-cooperative jurisdictions? I call on the Commission to look into this issue whilst reviewing the lists.

Secondly, if a Portuguese bank and Maltese financial service providers have helped Ms dos Santos is in her actions, where are the loopholes in our fight against tax fraud and against money laundering? This year’s anti-money laundering action plan and legislative files on taxation have to address these points. While rightly criticising the wrongdoings of Africa’s richest woman, we need to also ask ourselves why in the EU we facilitate such actions.

Procedura "catch the eye"

  Sirpa Pietikäinen (PPE). – Mr President, we all know that the biggest fault of the Anti—money Laundering Directive lies in the Member States; in poor implementation, lacking European powers on European prudential supervision, poor cooperation between financial intelligence units, the limited scope of powers of the Financial Intelligence Unit Platform to set standards. We know that the system is not working, because it’s not made to be working.

That is the reason, once again reminded, how ineffective we are. What I do hope is that the Commission would consider seriously chasing the anti-money laundering Directive to be a Regulation and to increase substantially the transparency of the beneficial ownership registers, increase the European prudential supervision, and to really set the system on place to function.

  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señor presidente, comisaria Dalli, bienvenida a este debate contra el blanqueo, que no es el primero, tiene mucha historia, porque antes de Luanda Leaks hubo Lux Leaks y hubo Panamá Leaks, y hubo una comisión de estudio e investigación, de la que fui miembro, que arrojó conclusiones y mandatos de actuación para la Comisión. Por eso hemos pasado de la cuarta a la quinta Directiva contra el blanqueo, que refuerza la transparencia y la identificación de los beneficiarios de las cuentas; porque cada uno de estos casos que acabo de citar empeora el trasfondo de corrupción y tráfico de influencias.

El caso Luanda Leaks es paroxístico porque afecta a la mujer más rica de África —la hija del antiguo presidente de Angola—.

Pero hay otro mandato: proteger a los whistleblowers —a los denunciantes—, porque es intolerable que haya países que no han traspuesto la Directiva sobre los whistleblowers —entre ellos, Portugal—, y resulta que Rui Pinto, el denunciante, es el que está en la cárcel, cuando quien tenía que estar en la cárcel no es el denunciante, sino los criminales y los delincuentes.

  Joachim Stanisław Brudziński (ECR). – Panie Przewodniczący! Wiele już tutaj zostało powiedziane. Po raz kolejny debatujemy nad aferami, po raz kolejny zastanawiamy się, czy proceder prania brudnych pieniędzy to domena tylko i wyłącznie państw tzw. Trzeciego Świata, czy to tylko Afryka, tanie raje podatkowe. Natomiast dziwnie się składa, że beneficjenci najczęściej te pieniądze albo lokują, albo wydają tutaj – w Europie. Dlatego trzeba powiedzieć wyraźnie: przestępcy dotychczas zawsze są krok przed demokratycznymi państwami prawa i przed służbami, które z tym procederem walczą.

Żadne poszczególne państwo nie będzie w stanie poradzić sobie, jeżeli nie będzie pełnej koordynacji. Jesienią ubiegłego roku pojawił się postulat 6 państw, aby tutaj – w Brukseli – powstał jeden urząd do walki z tym procederem. Ja mogę powiedzieć również z własnego doświadczenia, jako były minister spraw wewnętrznych i administracji w rządzie Rzeczpospolitej Polskiej, że sukcesy służb, które nadzorowałem, w dużej mierze były sukcesami wynikającymi ze współpracy z innymi służbami, z Europolem, z Interpolem. To jest jedyna droga, która pozwoli nam być krok przed przestępcami.

  Milan Uhrík (NI). – Mr President, in many EU Member States, the legislation regarding money laundering is being made increasingly strict, including by restricting the space for casinos and other games. However, this kind of online gambling remains still quite untouchable because it’s operated on a global, multinational level, and for a single state it is quite hard to touch it and to control it. My question is: are there any further plans for fighting against this kind of money laundering, this kind of criminality?

  Antonius Manders (PPE). – Voorzitter, witwassen gaat de laatste jaren steeds vaker via grote banken in Europa en het wordt tijd dat de bestuurders van die banken een gevangenisstraf krijgen in plaats van een bonus. Dat wil ik toevoegen, heel kort.

  Stanislav Polčák (PPE). – Pane předsedající, tady jsme svědky mezinárodní zločinecké aktivity a zároveň našich nízkých pravomocí a schopností tuto situaci řešit. Jedná se o zločin bílých límečků, který je velmi sofistikovaný, a já bych chtěl poděkovat samozřejmě novinářům, kteří se podíleli na odkrytí této aktivity, a také oznamovatelům. Ukazuje se, jaké máme výrazné mezery na ochraně oznamovatelů na mezinárodním poli.

Zároveň je pro mne šokující, kolik evropských struktur, myšleno tedy těch bankovních nebo svěřenských, bylo zapojeno do zakrývání právě podstaty vyvádění peněz a nelegálních aktivit v rámci Angoly. Co s tím? Máme 5 směrnic, zdá se, že potřebujeme překonat roztříštěnost, potřebujeme lépe implementovat. Je nepochybně nutné příslušné úřady více vybavit kompetencemi a hlavně, podle mého soudu, zajistit zisky. Není možné, aby zisky byly zajišťovány v tak mizivém procentu, jak se ukazuje např. v těch předchozích případech.

(Fine della procedura "catch the eye")

  Helena Dalli, Member of the Commission. – Mr President, on behalf of the Commission, I thank the European Parliament for taking the time to debate this topical matter, and for its commitment to further strengthening all our tools to deal with situations such as the one at stake. We need to act upon all these findings, and I am confident that we have already identified the way to ensure that the Union’s financial systems’ integrity is more effectively protected. We are determined to work with international partners on new threats from innovation and it is critical to already deploy all our efforts to ensure the current legislative framework is applied fully, and correctly. This also includes protection of whistleblowers and to give renewed impetus to the role of the Union in ensuring more effective and coordinated action.

  Nikolina Brnjac, President-in-Office of the Council. – Mr President, I have followed this debate with great attention, and I have also heard the input from the Commission. I take this opportunity to reaffirm the importance which the Presidency attaches to the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism, and I look forward to our continued work on these matters. The Presidency will remain available for exchanges on the subject as needed.

  Presidente. – La discussione è chiusa.

Dichiarazioni scritte (articolo 171)

  Enikő Győri (PPE), írásban. – Az Európai Bizottság részéről érkeztek olyan javaslatok, miszerint az EU pénzmosás és terrorizmus finanszírozása elleni fellépésének hatékonyabb módja az EU-szintű szabályozás jelentős megerősítése, valamint a felügyeleti funkciók uniós szintre emelése lenne. Aggályosnak tartom a felügyeleti funkciók új EU-szintű intézményekre való áthelyezését, a jelenlegi helyzet ugyanis nem támasztja alá, hogy a megoldást feltétlenül ez jelentené. Ehelyett a nemzeti hatóságok megerősítése és a nemzeti hatóságok közötti fokozottabb együttműködés a célravezető.

A nemzeti hatóságok ugyanis képesek kezelni a kihívásokat; ők vannak mindennapi szoros kapcsolatban a bankokkal, biztosítótársaságokkal, ügyvédekkel, valamint részletes és naprakész ismeretekkel rendelkeznek a helyi körülményekről. Egy központi felügyeleti szerv hatékonysága nem érheti el a tagállami intézmények által biztosított hatékonyságot. Bármiféle továbblépésnek a jelenlegi helyzet kiértékeléséből kell kiindulnia, és figyelembe kell vennie a már elfogadottuniós szabályozási elemek gyakorlati működését.

Annál is inkább, mert még nincs tapasztalatunk a közelmúltban bevezetett jogszabályok miként működnek a gyakorlatban. Az EU pénzmosás elleni rendszerének továbbfejlesztése természetesen kulcsfontosságú. A továbblépési módozatok között mérlegelni kell azonban a tagállami sajátosságokat figyelembe vevő és a szükséges tagállami mozgásteret továbbra is biztosító megközelítéseket is.