109 HR 6153 IH: To improve the delivery of counterterrorism financing U.S. House of Representatives 2006-09-21 text/xml EN Pursuant to Title 17 Section 105 of the United States Code, this file is not subject to copyright protection and is in the public domain.

I 109th CONGRESS 2d Session H. R. 6153 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES September 21, 2006 Ms. Moore of Wisconsin (for herself, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, and Mr. Scott of Georgia) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on International Relations, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned A BILL To improve the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance by providing for greater interagency coordination and cooperation, and for other purposes.

1.

Short title

This Act may be cited as the Counter Terrorism Financing Coordination Act.

2.

Findings

The Congress finds as follows: (1)In an October 2005 report to the Congress, the Comptroller General reviewed the United States Government’s interagency efforts to coordinate the delivery of training and technical assistance to countries vulnerable to terrorist financing, and issues of accountability in the blocking of terrorist assets held in the United States by the Secretary of the Treasury. (2)In April 2006, the Comptroller General of the United States testified before the Congress on the findings of the October 2005 report and, among other things, the Comptroller General testified that Although the United States Government provides a range of training and technical assistance to countries it deems vulnerable to terrorist financing, it does not have a strategic and integrated plan to coordinate the delivery of this assistance.. (3)The Terrorist Financing Working Group, an interagency entity established by the National Security Council and chaired by the Secretary of State, coordinates the delivery of training and technical assistance to nearly two dozen countries the Working Group considers to be priority countries, as well as to other countries the Working Group considers to be nonpriority countries, that are vulnerable to terrorist financing. (4)The Comptroller General testified that the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury disagree about the roles and procedures of each agency within the Terrorist Financing Working Group for the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance, thereby causing the overall effort to lack effective leadership. (5)An example of how this disagreement has impacted the delivery of training and technical assistance to countries vulnerable to terrorist financing is as follows: (A)In May 2005, the Department of State denied a Department of the Treasury employee official entry into a priority country in response to a request from the central bank of that country to set up a financial intelligence unit. (B)The Secretary of State told the Comptroller General that the Department wanted to conduct a Terrorist Financing Working Group assessment before allowing the Department of the Treasury to continue its work. (C)According to the report of the Government Accountability Office, the United States Ambassador to the country requested a delay in the assessment and the work of the Department of the Treasury was allowed to proceed. (D)However, as a result of this disagreement, the entry of the Department of the Treasury official into the country and the work itself was delayed by several months. (6)The Comptroller General testified that the interagency coordinating effort on terrorist financing training and technical assistance lacked other key elements that are critical to effective strategic planning, such as the strategic alignment of resources with needs and risks, and a process to measure results. (7)The October 2005 report of the Comptroller General found that the Attorney General, who provides technical assistance in the drafting of anti-terrorist financing legislation for priority countries, concluded that having procedures and practices for Terrorist Financing Working Group priority countries that differ from those for other vulnerable countries creates problems. (8)The October 2005, report of the Comptroller General cited several instances of interagency disagreements on whether it is appropriate for contractors for the United States to provide legislative drafting assistance for counterterrorism financing legislation. (9)In connection with this disagreement, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General believe that legislative drafting should be conducted by officials of the Department of Justice, while the Secretary of the Treasury, in some instances, advocated the use of contractors for nonpriority countries. (10)The Attorney General objected to the use of contractors and indicated that previous contractor work on legislative drafting did not meet international standards for effective counterterrorism financing legislation, citing as an example the work of a contractor to the Agency for International Development who assisted in drafting legislation which officials of the Department of Justice had to complete because the draft included substantial deficiencies, in the opinion of the Attorney General. (11)In April 2006, officials representing the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury testified before the Financial Services Committee of the House of Representatives that they did not act on the Comptroller General’s recommendations to develop a strategic and integrated plan for the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance and to enter into an interagency Memorandum of Agreement that clarifies each agency’s roles and responsibilities. (12)The officials testified that both the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury believe that an integrated strategic plan already exists and that There is no desire among the Terrorist Financing Working Group agencies to reinvent a process that has worked well for several years and worked even better since the issuance of the General Accountability Office report.. (13)The Comptroller General recommended in his congressional testimony that Congress require the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury to submit an annual report to Congress showing the status of interagency efforts to develop and implement an integrated strategic plan and Memorandum of Agreement to ensure Terrorist Financing Working Group’s seamless functioning, particularly with respect to Terrorist Financing Working Group roles and procedures.

3.

Memorandum of agreement required

(a)

In general

The Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury shall negotiate and enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (hereafter in this section referred to as the Agreement) specifying the role of each of the Secretary’s respective Department in the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance provided to countries abroad (without regard to whether any country is designated as a priority country or a nonpriority country by the Terrorist Financing Working Group). (b)

Specific subject to be included

In addition to such other matters as the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury determine to be appropriate for inclusion in the Agreement, the Agreement shall include the following: (1)

Leadership and role

The specific designation of leadership, and the role of each agency, in the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance to all countries (without regard to whether any country is designated as a priority country or a nonpriority country by the Terrorist Financing Working Group). (2)

Dispute resolution methodology

A methodology and procedures for resolving interagency disputes over the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance, which shall include specific and reasonable timeframes for seeking such resolution before elevating unresolved disagreements to the next level of decision-making, up to and including the Secretaries, and a process for submitting any disputes the Secretaries are unable to resolve within a specific and reasonable timeframe to the National Security Council for resolution. (3)

Coordination of funding and resources

The coordination of funding and resources for counterterrorism financing and anti-money laundering training and technical assistance delivered to all countries (without regard to whether any country is designated as a priority country or a nonpriority country by the Terrorist Financing Working Group), including the means for providing a transparent assessment of United States Government resources and a method for aligning those resources with the needs of vulnerable countries. (4)

Private contractors

A procedure for determining the appropriateness of any use of contractors by the Secretary of the Treasury in the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance in any country (without regard to whether the country is designated as a priority country or a nonpriority country by the Terrorist Financing Working Group), including a system for evaluating, in consultation with the Secretary of State, the Attorney General and other appropriate officers, the quality of work performed by such contractors. (5)

Performance evaluation

A process to measure the performance and results of counterterrorism training and technical assistance.

4.

Annual report

(a)

In general

The Secretary of the Treasury shall include in the annual report to the Congress on terrorist assets complete information on the nature and extent of activities, during the period covered by the report, in blocking access of owners or account holders to financial assets due to the connection of such owners or accountholders to terrorism. (b)

Contents

The report under subsection (a) shall include the following: (1)The results of the performance evaluation under Memorandum of Agreement entered into pursuant to section 3 for the period covered by the report. (2)Differences in amounts blocked between the period covered by the report and preceding periods. (3)When and why blocks were removed from financial assets during period covered by the report. (4)The achievements and obstacles faced by the United States Government with respect to locating and blocking terrorist assets or in the delivery of counterterrorism financing training and technical assistance. (5)A classified index.