This paper challenges the widely shared view that the United States and international frameworks regulating terrorist finance and money laundering (AML/CFT) is productive and effective.
Through a careful look at the evidence regarding the formal and informal fund transfer systems, this paper shows that security, crime control, and economic policy objectives are systematically frustrated by ill-conceived and misapplied rules. U.S. federal and state regulations in particular illustrate how unrealistic, unaffordable, and counter-productive are current arrangements. The paper concludes with some suggestions about how to reverse the ongoing fact-free policymaking process. (Published abstract provided)
Downloads
Similar Publications
- Habeas Litigation in U.S. District Courts: An Empirical Study of Habeas Corpus Cases Filed by State Prisoners Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Final Technical Report
- NIJ (National Institute of Justice)/Hoover Institution Conference on Economic Activity and Crime - A Summary and Comments
- Examining the Effects of Juvenile Drug Treatment Courts: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis