|
|
|
EFCC’s shot at multiple accounts
The Economic and Financial Crime Commission, EFCC, is dreaming up a new idea to combat financial crimes. It wants multiple banks accounts abolished by the three tiers of governments and corporate individuals. According to the EFCC, operation of multiple bank accounts promotes money laundering and other financial crimes.
Mr. Ibrahim Lamorde, the acting Chairman of the EFCC while addressing the audience at the 2nd Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Financial Terrorism Compliance Stakeholders Summit in Abuja, urged financial institutions to join in the latest ambition of the EFCC. “Without doubt, if the lessons of the past will be well learnt, operating multiple accounts had been a clear procedure for managing proceeds of crime, which now calls for an urgent action if we are sincere in containing criminal profits,” Mr. Lamorde said.
Without providing any explanations, Mr. Lamorde continued, “Are there people in our midst who will want to understand the implications? Well, we are talking here of sums that are huge enough to manipulate markets, infiltrate business, perpetrate commercial frauds, corrupt officials and politicians and destabilise the polity”.
The EFCC’s position of a one-all solution for this situation is like decapitating a man to ensure he never had headaches. Financial crimes may be a major headache for the EFCC, but this challenge cannot upturn the benefits of multiple accounts. Many institutions demand multiple accounts for their operations. How would a state government operate one account? Is the EFCC unaware that some contractual agreements between governments and some organisations demand that the financials are captured in separate bank accounts? This also applies to other organisations. Some entities have different accounts for staff emoluments, pensions, working capital, projects and other needs that they try to handle separately to simplify their accounting.
Multiple accounts have been abused in some instances. On the part of governments, the weaknesses of the legislative arms in their oversight functions and outright corruption are responsible. For companies, collusion between dubious executives and auditors see to the looting of companies’ resources. These abuses are not as a result of multiple accounts. There are procedures for governments and other organisations to open bank accounts. If they are faithfully followed, the stated abuses would not result. We should not lump the innocent with the guilty because they both operate multiple accounts. Financial transactions are almost impossible for individuals and organisations without multiple bank accounts. After the crash of some banks, the public learnt to spread resources across several banks. Banks would not extend credits or businesses to organisations that do not have accounts with those banks. How would the EFCC assist in these instances? Is the EFCC only interested in making its own job easier?
Deeper think is required to counter economic and financial crimes, abolishing multiple bank accounts is surely not part of it.
|
|
|
