教授，博士生導師。復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中心首任主任，復旦大學俄...
復旦大學國際金融學院教授，中國反洗錢研究中心執行主任，陸家嘴金...
復旦大學法學院教授、博士生導師；復旦大學國際刑法研究中心主任。...
華東政法大學刑法學教授，復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中心特聘研究員，荷...
安永金融服務風險管理、咨詢總監，曾任螞蟻金服反洗錢總監，復旦大學...
周錦賢先生，香港人，廣州暨南大學法律學士，復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中...
高級經濟師，復旦大學金融學博士，復旦大學經濟學博士后。現供職于中...
武漢中南財經政法大學信息安全學院教授。長期專注于反洗錢/反恐...
生辰：1977.7.26 籍貫：遼寧撫順 民族：漢 黨派：九三學社 職稱：教授 研究...
祝亞雄，1974年生，浙江衢州人。浙江師范大學經濟與管理學院副教授，博...
復旦大學中國反洗錢研究中心特聘研究員；現任安永管理咨詢服務合伙...
工作履歷：曾在國家審計署從事審計工作，是國家第一批政府審計師；曾在...
Jan.22, 2010
A report presented recently by the Public Prosecution to a Misdemeanours Court came in favour of the defendants in a £150 million money laundering case.
According to the report, which was prepared by a Dubai Police special committee, there is no proof that the defendants, including an Emirati, a British, an Indian, a Pakistani and seven firms were involved in money laundering. The committee, comprised officers of the Organised Crime Section, inspection officers at the UAE Central Bank as well as a prosecutor, said in its report that there is no decisive evidence to incriminate the four defendants and the firms currently on trial in the money laundering case.
Defence counsel Eissa Bin Haidar who represents the Emirati, the British — both business partners — and the Pakistani manager, requested the court to be granted some time to prepare his defence arguments.
The case is the biggest of its kind in recent times dating back to August 2006 when the Organised Crime Section of the Dubai Police was tipped off about the involvement of some individuals and firms in Dubai in money-laundering operations. The firms’ statements of accounts suggested that there was a suspicious flow of funds and huge amounts totalling £150 million, the prosecutors said.
Bin Haider of Bin Haider Advocates and Legal Consultants earlier asked the court how the authorities could jail individuals and freeze their assets while there is no proof to incriminate them.
“Obviously, the case facts took place in 2007 and 2008 while my clients were jailed and their assets frozen in 2006,” Bin Haider earlier argued in the court.
Prosecutors found that the funds were transferred between the firms’ accounts here and other accounts in European countries. The alleged money laundering supposedly happened in a European country while there is still no registered case in that particular country, the lawyer said.
The report by the Dubai Police committee came negative as to any proof found against them. The special panel earlier received an audit report by an expert from the British Income and Customs Authority, which did not say that the defendants swindled the UK Treasury. The panel knew that the British expert has not been able to determine the source of the funds transferred to two companies in Dubai.
Dubai Public Prosecution believes that the funds (£150 million) were made by cheating the Income and Customs Departments in two European countries whereas the defendants were trading in merchandise through fictitious contracts in order to raise the products’ market value and then re-export the same merchandise.
They would change the names of their companies and their commercial activities every now and then. They would also transfer huge amounts of money through individuals and money exchange agencies to different parties without legal documents.
The defendants allegedly submitted forged documents to UAE Central Bank to justify nearly Dh18 million found in one of the companies owned by ?the suspects. Earlier, they all pleaded not guilty to money laundering and forgery charges.