Current Affairs The Conservative Party

Status
Not open for further replies.
20430502898_e11fdb0ac9_z.jpg

OPL 245 oil scandal: JP Morgan reveals UK cops gave go-ahead to transfer $875m to convicted money launderer
FacebookTwitterSubscribe

By Lionel Faull, Nick Mathiason and Ted Jeory



The UK’s frontline anti-money laundering unit gave the green light to transfer $875m from a “corrupt” oil deal – to a high profile politician with a money laundering conviction.

The shocking revelation is contained in High Court documents filed last week by JP Morgan Chase Bank.

Defending itself from a massive claim for damages by the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the US bank claims it repeatedly sought consent from the Serious Organised Crime Agency (Soca) to make the payments.

But instead of being told to block the transfers, the bank says it was given the green light to proceed.

Why that permission was granted has not been explained, but campaigners say the decision means there is “real cause for concern” about the UK’s current anti-money laundering regime.

The green lights to make the payments in two tranches in 2011 and 2013 were given by Soca, at the time the UK’s main anti-corruption unit which reported to the Home Secretary – then Theresa May.


Theresa May was Home Secretary when Soca allowed JP Morgan to transfer cash to a money launderer

The payments – to a front company controlled by Nigeria’s former oil minister Chief Dan Etete – were the proceeds from what is alleged to be one of the world’s most corrupt oil deals.

As oil minister in 1998, Etete had awarded a massive untapped oil block off the coast of Nigeria known as OPL 245 to a company called Malabu, in which he secretly held a major stake.

After leaving government and following several years of legal disputes, Etete decided to reject overtures from Russia and China and eventually sold the block to Shell and Italian oil company Eni in 2011 for $1.1bn.

The deal also involved the former Nigerian government of Goodluck Jonathan which agreed to act as a middleman. This meant Shell and Eni were not contracting directly with Etete.

At the time of the deal, Shell and Eni knew not only that Etete controlled Malabu, but also that he had been convicted on an unrelated money laundering case in Paris in 2007.


Former Nigeria oil minister Dan Etete (via Premium Times)

The 2011 deal has since triggered police raids in Italy and the Netherlands, and an array of legal cases. Shell, Eni and former executives from both companies are due to stand trial on corruption charges in Italy in May.

Campaigners who have investigated the deal have also long raised questions about JP Morgan’s role, arguing its London branch should never have facilitated the transfers to Etete’s front company in 2011 and 2013. JP Morgan has always and continues to deny any wrongdoing but until last week, it had never provided any details on what warnings it may have raised or why it decided to proceed.

As Finance Uncovered revealed last December, the bank is defending itself against a claim for $875m, plus interest, which was filed by the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Nigeria alleges the bank had been “grossly negligent” in making the payments.

Finance Uncovered has now obtained JP Morgan’s defence, which was filed by City law firm Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer last week.

In it, the bank argues that the instructions to pay Etete’s company were valid and legal and came from its client, the Nigerian government.

According to the court document, JP Morgan also admits it knew it was paying the money to a company associated with Etete and that he had a money laundering conviction.

However, it says it complied fully with UK anti-money laundering laws by raising a series of Suspicious Activity Reports with Soca for various requests to pay Etete’s company over two years.

These reports would have detailed the bank’s concerns, including any red flags about Etete, Malabu and his money laundering conviction.

Officials from Soca, which was disbanded by Theresa May in late 2013 when its much criticised operations folded into the new National Crime Agency, would then have made various checks and assessments before giving any permission to proceed.

In its court filing, JP Morgan says it was repeatedly given consent from Soca.

Only one occasion, in July 2013 for a requested payment of $74m, did Soca refuse – but the agency made a U-turn a few weeks later.

On two occasions, even after Soca had given consent, the payments failed because banks in Switzerland and Lebanon declined to touch Etete’s money.

JP Morgan finally secured successful transfers for the bulk of the money in August 2011, two payments totalling $801.4m to Malabu accounts at two Nigerian banks.

Barnaby Pace, an anti-corruption campaigner at Global Witness, which has spent years investigating the OPL245 deal, said the revelations in JP Morgan’s new court filing raise serious questions for the UK authorities.

He said: “If we want to stop corrupt deals happening in the future we need to address the systems that make them possible. There must be accountability for individuals and institutions that enable corruption in major financial centres like London.

“The failure of the UK’s anti-money laundering regime to prevent this billion dollar payment to a front company owned by a former minister and convicted money launderer is a real cause for concern.”

We asked the National Crime Agency, which is the successor organisation to Soca, why the preeminent UK anti-money laundering enforcement agency allowed huge sums to pass to a convicted money launderer.

While refusing to comment on “individual cases of litigation”, it said that the transaction predated the NCA’s existence.

The NCA added: “Under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA) a reporting organisation which has received a defence from the NCA, or formerly SOCA, under POCA for a transaction has a defence against money laundering charges in a court. This is commonly known as the consent regime.

“Responsibility for undertaking the transaction or activity, or not undertaking it, remains with the reporting organisation.”

The Home Office is considering a series of questions posed by Finance Uncovered at the time of publication.

It is alleged that the money from the OPL245 deal was used to buy a private jet and armoured Cadillacs in the US, fine art and luxury shotguns in London, and to pay a series of kickbacks to various officials.

Last year Finance Uncovered reported that two Shell staff members now in the dock in Italy were believed to be former MI6 agents and that Shell had a policy of recruiting former security agents to an internal intelligence-gathering body, which had a direct line to top executives in London and The Hague.

According to internal Shell documents obtained by Finance Uncovered and Global Witness last year, a senior Shell executive received a briefing in 2010 that stated: “In country view [in Nigeria] is that the President is motivated to see [OPL]245 closed quickly-driven by expectations about the proceeds that Malabu will receive and political contributions that will flow as a consequence.”

The two former MI6 agents also shared intelligence with their superiors that rival Russian and Chinese oil companies were interested in acquiring the rights to OPL 245.

Shell and Eni and its former executives who are due to stand trial in Italy all deny any wrongdoing, as has Etete.

Goodluck Jonathan, who is not facing trial, also denies the claims.

*JP Morgan’s court filing can be read here.
 



Lord Sugar
@Lord_Sugar

Hi Tossers , yes I am up for an elected house of Lords . I will be elected. as a lot of people admire me unlike you lot of red lefties who are resentful, jealous and bitter non achievers. When you are a life loser ,you moan about others .
 
This heartless disgraceful government will stop at nothing to penalise the poor, vulnerable and disabled. After the revelations this government has overseen over 1 million sanctions against disabled people.

Mentally unwell woman has disability benefits stopped because assessor failed to turn up to home visit
Exclusive: Michelle Moloney, 40, who suffers from bipolar disorder type 2 and severe anxiety, was left unable to buy groceries after it was wrongly claimed she failed to attend assessment

michelle.jpg

Ms Moloney missed out on £685 last month as a result of the error
A mentally ill woman has had her disability benefits stopped because her assessor failed to turn up to a home visit, leaving her unable to buy basic groceries and suffering high levels of anxiety.

Michelle Moloney, 40, was left hundreds of pounds down after she was informed by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) that because she “didn’t go” the assessment her Disability Living Allowance (DLA) would stop and her Personal Independent Payment (PIP) had been refused.

Capita, the company sub-contracted by the government to carry out disability benefit assessments, has since said the assessor arrived at the wrong time and apologised to Ms Moloney that their service “fell short of its high standards”.

READ MORE
Ms Moloney, who lives in Nottinghamshire and suffers from bipolar disorder type 2, severe anxiety, and has a history of self-harm, received a letter from the DWP on 28 February stating that her PIP claim had been refused.

It went on to state: "This is because you didn't go to the assessment on 14 February 2018 and we don't think you've given us a good reason for this."

When Ms Moloney sent a letter of complaint to Capita with the help of a friend, they responded on 14 March saying that based on information they had received from the assessor ("a description of her house") meant they were "unable to uphold" the complaint.

But after being contacted by The Independent, Capita sent Ms Moloney another email on 28 March stating: "Following a further review of your appointment on 14 February 2018 it became apparent the Disability Assessor attended your property earlier than the scheduled appointment time.

"DWP agreed to send the case back to Capita for a new appointment. I can confirm an appointment has been scheduled for 9.15am on Monday 16 April 2018 at your home address."

As a result of the error, Ms Moloney missed out on £685 last month, which left her unable to eat properly and suffering from high levels of anxiety.

“I’ve not done my usual online shop. I’ve been living off bread and cheese rather than getting proper food to cook. I’ve been scared to spend money. I cancelled everything that wasn’t a must be paid direct debit,” she told The Independent.

“It’s increased my anxiety levels too, worrying about it and what I was going to do without that money and how long it would take for an appeal to get to a tribunal.

“It has really upset me, more so because they messed up and stopped all my ESA instead of just the severe disability premium on it and I didn’t have any idea what was going on with that.

“Just losing the DLA, being refused PIP and having to figure out what I needed to do to start the process of appealing was stressful. My mood has dropped a lot.”

Charity Disability Rights UK said they routinely see poor practice in the way disability assessments are carried out, saying it was "unacceptable" that private companies are paid large sums of money to provide this service.

Ken Butler, welfare benefits advisor at the charity, told The Independent: “Time and time again we hear of poor assessment practices when it comes to disability benefits. This has a massive impact on people who qualify but are turned down for benefits because of bad administration and decision making.

“It’s unacceptable that companies like Capita, Atos and Maximus are paid hundreds of millions of pounds every year to provide a service to the public and are allowed to continue with their poor practices.

“The government should be doing more to hold them to account, and penalising them when they fail to deliver.”

He urged the government to “seriously consider” transferring responsibility for assessments to the public sector, rather than allowing them to be used as a “profit-making exercise”.

“In the meantime, disabled people must fully compensated for any extra costs they’ve incurred as a result of a poor assessment,” he added.

A Capita spokesperson, said: “We apologise to the individual that our service fell short of our high standards. On the rare occasion that this does happen, we investigate thoroughly and work with the person directly to address their issue.”

They added that they had been advised by DWP that her benefits have been reinstated.

It emerged last month that Capita and Independent Assessment Services (formerly known as Atos) – another private firm contracted by the government to carry out disability assessments – received a £40m increase in funding last year despite widespread concerns with the system.

A freedom of information request by The Independent found the DWP paid the companies nearly £255m last year to perform PIP assessments – the highest amount spent on the scheme since its launch in 2013.

It came after the High Court ruled the system was “blatantly discriminatory” against people with mental health conditions, prompting the Government to announce it will review 1.6 million disability benefit claims. It could see up to 220,000 claimants receive higher payments.

The DWP came under fire last week after an investigation by the National Audit Office revealed the department had underpaid an estimated 70,000 people who transferred to ESA from other benefits over the past seven years".
 
hullefc said:
This heartless disgraceful government will stop at nothing to penalise the poor, vulnerable and disabled. After the revelations this government has overseen over 1 million sanctions against disabled people.
Click to expand...
But that's completely at odds with the story you just posted. That's the story of somebody absolutely fluffing up their job and one that would be repeated regardless of whatever government was in charge.
 
zzr45 said:
But that's completely at odds with the story you just posted. That's the story of somebody absolutely fluffing up their job and one that would be repeated regardless of whatever government was in charge.
Click to expand...

"Sanctions – the cutting or withholding of benefits – are applied as a punishment when claimants infringe the conditions of their payments by, say, as missing appointments or failing to apply for enough jobs.

While the sanctions regime has been championed by the government as a means of encouraging people to take a job or boosting their chances of finding one, most experts consulted as part of the Demos project concluded that conditionality has little or no effect on improving employment for disabled people. There was also widespread anecdotal evidence that the threat of sanctions can lead to anxiety and broader ill health".

And the reward for the organisation that 'fluffing up their job' "It emerged last month that Capita and Independent Assessment Services (formerly known as Atos) – another private firm contracted by the government to carry out disability assessments – received a £40m increase in funding last year despite widespread concerns with the system".

The DWP informed the lady that she would be sanctioned. The DWP is responsible for paying out benefits and the Tory minster Esther McVey is in charge of DWP, appointed by the Tory government.

"The Secretary of State has overall responsibility for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). They have direct responsibility for departmental expenditure and departmental management.

DWP is responsible for the administration of the State Pension and working age benefits system, providing support to:

  • people of working age
  • employers
  • pensioners
  • families and children
  • disabled people
McVey is in charge and no amount of 'job fluffing' can deflect from the Tories heartlessness against the poor, vulnerable and disabled.

"The former TV presenter once claimed that the use of food banks was "right". She also said that benefits sanctions "teach" job seekers to look for work seriously".

But sanctions 'teach people to look for work'. Over 1 million sanctions against disabled people many illegally as with others claiming benefits.

But sanctions 'work.

Benefits sanctions are working the way they are supposed to, Iain Duncan Smith says
The sanctions have been associated with child poverty, homelessness, and unfair decisions.

"“We do believe that the advisors apply sanctions in the way that they’re meant to do.” Independent 2015. Really.

The Tories are in charge and they are responsible.
 
zzr45 said:
But that's completely at odds with the story you just posted. That's the story of somebody absolutely fluffing up their job and one that would be repeated regardless of whatever government was in charge.
Click to expand...

More examples of 'job fluffing'. But don't forget 'sanctions work' and 'teach those on benefits to really look for work' even when they can't work.

It was my job to impose cruel benefit sanctions – that the DWP can’t justify
Angela Neville
Job advisers like me were told withholding benefits would encourage vulnerable people to find a job. It turns out there’s no evidence that sanctions work

Wed 30 Nov 2016 17.58 GMT

As a jobcentre adviser I was once told to call in a “customer” to get them on to the Work Programme. I explained that he was about to be admitted to hospital for major surgery, but I was told he must be called, otherwise he would face a sanction that could stop his benefits for four weeks.

After a year in the job, in Braintree, Essex, a demonstrable shift had taken place once the coalition government had settled in. Advisers were encouraged to see every interview as an opportunity to begin the process of sanctions that might suspend or cancel claims, thereby reducing the number of claimants. We were repeatedly told that such extreme measures were used as a benign incentive, to remind people of an alternative to life dependent on benefits. But we weren’t given any evidence that they actually worked.

And according to Tuesday’s National Audit Office report, that’s because the Department for Work and Pensions never had any evidence. So it’s been dishonest all along about the reasons for enforcing sanctions. Moreover, it has failed to monitor the devastating effect on thousands of people whose benefits have been withheld. My primary experience was with people on health-related benefits, so I was expected to apply aggressive targets to some of the most vulnerable people in society if they were five minutes late for an interview or failed to apply for enough jobs. Some were literally without food and couldn’t afford heating. Whereas I used to feel I was doing something for clients, I increasingly felt I was getting “brownie points” for cruelty.

The bureaucracy itself seemed deliberately contrived to confuse and distress claimants. This didn’t just affect those dealing with literacy or mental health issues. Many clients, often high-achieving professionals, or people who’d worked all their life – like the eponymous hero in Ken Loach’s film I, Daniel Blake, who suddenly through redundancy or injury for the first time in their lives were forced to claim benefits – found the process just as daunting and humiliating.

Pressure on staff to achieve targets was intense. Team meetings often left colleagues in tears. As sickness absence also contributed to office statistics, this increased the stress on staff performance. I was managing a caseload of about 200 customers. However, rather than supporting them into work or training, I was forced to concentrate on trying to find resourceful ways of meeting targets. One colleague was so distressed by the work that she spoke of suicide as a means of protest. I have worked in many stressful jobs, including in education and the NHS, but I had never heard a colleague openly say they had been driven to contemplate suicide. When I was made redundant three years ago due to my own health issues, I was relieved to be out of such a callous system.

I felt compelled to provide an honest account of issues consistently sensationalised by the popular media. I worked with my friend Angela Howard and writer Jackie Bartlett on a play, about our experiences of the welfare system, called Can This Be England? We wanted it to show how tendencies in wider society and the media to stigmatise and vilify benefits claimants needed to be challenged. The title of the play alluded to our disbelief at how people on benefits were being treated.

It opens with a scene where nosy neighbours spot someone on sickness benefits in the street and assume they must be skiving. Sometimes I think we are turning into a really mean, spying-on-our-neighbourhood, type of society.

We performed the play several times last year, and each performance was followed by a discussion when the audience could ask questions about the issues involved and, importantly, to share their own experiences. We’ve since recorded a radio adaptation so more people will be able to hear the characters and their stories. Can This Be England? seems to have affected people by reflecting their own lives, or by making them much more aware of the impact of benefit sanctions.

I have recently spoken to former colleagues who remain working for the jobcentre and I am in no doubt that the system of earning brownie points towards targets still exists. The reality is that sanctions are used as one-size-fits-all in a system driven by financial and political targets regardless of entitlement and eligibility.

We can’t easily stop this, but we can do all we can to bring this inhumanity to light".
 
hullefc said:
"Sanctions – the cutting or withholding of benefits – are applied as a punishment when claimants infringe the conditions of their payments by, say, as missing appointments or failing to apply for enough jobs.

While the sanctions regime has been championed by the government as a means of encouraging people to take a job or boosting their chances of finding one, most experts consulted as part of the Demos project concluded that conditionality has little or no effect on improving employment for disabled people. There was also widespread anecdotal evidence that the threat of sanctions can lead to anxiety and broader ill health".

And the reward for the organisation that 'fluffing up their job' "It emerged last month that Capita and Independent Assessment Services (formerly known as Atos) – another private firm contracted by the government to carry out disability assessments – received a £40m increase in funding last year despite widespread concerns with the system".

The DWP informed the lady that she would be sanctioned. The DWP is responsible for paying out benefits and the Tory minster Esther McVey is in charge of DWP, appointed by the Tory government.

"The Secretary of State has overall responsibility for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). They have direct responsibility for departmental expenditure and departmental management.

DWP is responsible for the administration of the State Pension and working age benefits system, providing support to:

  • people of working age
  • employers
  • pensioners
  • families and children
  • disabled people
McVey is in charge and no amount of 'job fluffing' can deflect from the Tories heartlessness against the poor, vulnerable and disabled.

"The former TV presenter once claimed that the use of food banks was "right". She also said that benefits sanctions "teach" job seekers to look for work seriously".

But sanctions 'teach people to look for work'. Over 1 million sanctions against disabled people many illegally as with others claiming benefits.

But sanctions 'work.

Benefits sanctions are working the way they are supposed to, Iain Duncan Smith says
The sanctions have been associated with child poverty, homelessness, and unfair decisions.

"“We do believe that the advisors apply sanctions in the way that they’re meant to do.” Independent 2015. Really.

The Tories are in charge and they are responsible.
Click to expand...
Ah, of course. There was never ever any problems with the DWP under the previous governments watch. Not wasted money or fraud. It could be yet again that it’s not as simple as it seems.
 
peteblue said:
There’s far too much cut and paste in here.......
Click to expand...
And far too many full stops. Is the button on your computer stuck? That happened to a bloke I went to school with after he w*nked his dog off over his Commodore 64, the F2 button got jammed by dried dog jizz.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top