Page 32 - ACAMS-Today-V20N3

[ PRACTICAL SOLUTIONS ]
All law enforcement requests for additional information should be received and fulfilled by a single team
The importance of coordination
One may wonder what potential harm could come if a law enforcement agency was unaware that there was one or more concurrent investigations? In the best-case scenario, the involved law enforcement agencies would eventually learn of each other’s efforts and each would welcome the additional law enforcement assistance. Historically, bureaucracy and agency incompatibility prevent this happily-ever-after tale. One agency would likely yield their concurrent investigation upon awareness of the coexisting investigation. Beyond a statistical loss that could come from conceding the case, there is a range of metaphorical and literal cost law enforcement can experience. The time invested in the investi- gation would have been all for nothing and the fiscal waste of resources and manpower could have been applied to an alternate investigation. A slightly worse scenario would be that an investi- gation could progress without potentially key evidence that is held by another law enforcement agency working a different angle of the investigation. If only these agencies were paired, then both investigations would meld into one comprehensive investigation to present to an attorney for a likely successful prosecution. Finally, the worst-case scenario is one in which multiple law enforcement agencies unknowingly take positive actions against the target at the same time resulting in a “blue on blue” scenario, meaning a deadly crossfire situation.
All the above scenarios are always possible but in an effort to make them highly improbable, some FIs have taken proactive measures to mitigate the physical, financial and statistical risk for law enforcement. To that end, below is industry feedback from FI representatives investing in law enforcement relationships.
In the following interview, Christopher Ruzich of Standard Chartered America’s Financial Crime Compliance team describes the “matchmaking 101” methodology that can be used by a multina- tional FI to connect law enforcement agencies sharing the same goal. Similar to software technology matching traits of prospective members on a dating site, Ruzich and his team assess not only the law enforcement agent but evaluate both historical and current requests for information.
ACAMS Today: What preplanning (if any) exists to make the connection between law enforcement?
Chris Ruzich: All law enforcement requests for additional information should be received and fulfilled by a single team. A single point of contact is important. Having all the requests tracked by the same team allows that team to determine if prior requests for supporting documentation were received for the same suspicious activity report (SAR).
If the request for supporting documentation is communicated to the investigator or team that produced the SAR, the investigator and/or team should also be provided with a list of all prior requests for documentation on the same SAR. The investigator who handled the prior requests may have already discussed his or her investi- gation with the investigating agent(s) who made the prior request(s). For example, an FBI analyst requests supporting documentation on a SAR that was the subject of a prior request for information by a special agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). The AML investigator who produced the SAR may have previously discussed his or her investigation with the DEA special agent.
AT: How is the match made?
CR: FIs cannot disclose requests for supporting documentation without the permission of the requesting law enforcement agency. I suggest that permission be obtained in order to introduce the two (or more) agents who requested supporting documentation on the same SAR by sending messages like the following to each agent individually:
• To the new requester:
“Another law enforcement agency may have previously requested supporting documentation on this same SAR. With your permission, I can introduce you to any detective/agent who has previously requested the same documentation. This introduction may offer you the opportunity to deconflict and coordinate.”
• To the original requester:
“Another law enforcement agency may have subsequently requested supporting documentation on this SAR. With your permission, I can introduce you to any detective/agent who subsequently requested the same documentation. This introduction will give you an opportunity to deconflict and coordinate.”
The purpose of these messages is to obtain written approval from the law enforcement representative. The match can only be made after both agents/agencies provide written permission to make the introduction. If one of the two refuses to provide permission to disclose the request to the other, the FI cannot disclose the request. Under those circumstances, you may want to ask the one party who did provide permission if you can disclose his or her request to the agency that declined to provide permission.
32 [ JUNE-AUGUST 2021 ]