User Rating: 5 / 5
Abdul Mohammed Waked Fares, whose attorneys are appealing the sweeping OFAC designation of his family's Panama business empire, has filed his Reply Brief of Appellant. It does not appear to raise any new issues, or present any new arguments.
The issues presented:
(1) OFACs limited disclosure, in response to a request, violates Due Process, as it is devoid of any evidence. (All the Law Enforcement Sensitive material was redacted). Only a summary of the facts was included in the OFAC request for information.
(2) The OFAC response violates Due Process, as it is too vague for a meaningful rebuttal. The information was insufficient to allow Appellant to challenge the factual basis for the designation.
(3) Pursuant to the Kingpin Act, OFAC is allowed to withhold evidence which is classified, but it can them rely upon such undisclosed information, to defend a merits challenge of the designation in court. The result is an absurdity.
These issues were previously raised in the Appellant's Initial Brief; it appears that the vast majority of appellate challenges to adverse rulings of OFAC designations have not been successful.
Reputed Waked Money Laundering organization partner, Nidal Waked, recently changed his plea to guilty, in a criminal case in the Southern District of Florida. This matter is unconnected to the civil appeal of the OFAC designation, but his subsequent cooperation could result in additional indictments of Waked principals, their controlled corporations, and other participants in the alleged conspiracy.
The issues presented:
(1) OFACs limited disclosure, in response to a request, violates Due Process, as it is devoid of any evidence. (All the Law Enforcement Sensitive material was redacted). Only a summary of the facts was included in the OFAC request for information.
(2) The OFAC response violates Due Process, as it is too vague for a meaningful rebuttal. The information was insufficient to allow Appellant to challenge the factual basis for the designation.
(3) Pursuant to the Kingpin Act, OFAC is allowed to withhold evidence which is classified, but it can them rely upon such undisclosed information, to defend a merits challenge of the designation in court. The result is an absurdity.
These issues were previously raised in the Appellant's Initial Brief; it appears that the vast majority of appellate challenges to adverse rulings of OFAC designations have not been successful.
Reputed Waked Money Laundering organization partner, Nidal Waked, recently changed his plea to guilty, in a criminal case in the Southern District of Florida. This matter is unconnected to the civil appeal of the OFAC designation, but his subsequent cooperation could result in additional indictments of Waked principals, their controlled corporations, and other participants in the alleged conspiracy.
Chronicles of Monte Friesner - Senior Financial Crime Analyst
Contributed by Kenneth Rijock - Financial Crime Consultant
