At the end of this mission, ACAPS also made recommendations to the EAR and IA.
The Insurance and Social Welfare Control Authority (ACAPS) has just published the results of its last sector control mission on the aspect of the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism (AML / CFT). At the end of this mission, carried out from the first quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, the regulator decided on a draft of sanctions against 2 companies and sanctions against 6 intermediaries. Here’s why.
The Insurance and Social Welfare Supervisory Authority (ACAPS) is continuing its actions to supervise and support the sector in the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism (AML/FT). It has just published the results of its latest inspection of insurance and reinsurance companies (EAR) and intermediaries (IA). Conducted from the first quarter of 2021 to the first quarter of 2022, this mission enabled the on-site inspection of 5 companies and 16 intermediaries, in addition to periodic AML/CFT questionnaires (for 23 EAR and 26 IA) and monitoring interviews (respectively 2 and 5). This is to ensure compliance with the provisions of circular AS/02/19 relating to the obligations of vigilance and internal monitoring incumbent on the EAR and IA, two years after its entry into force and to support them in their AML compliance. /FT, in particular with FATF standards.
At the level of the EAR, the mission revealed that 2 companies (their names are not disclosed) among the 5 checked do not yet have a filtering tool (Filtering of persons subject to the freezing of assets, persons under sanctions subject to enhanced vigilance and screening of PEPs: politically exposed persons). In addition, 2 EAR among the 5 audited do not have sufficient human resources and an efficient organization for the accomplishment of the various AML/CFT compliance missions. Similarly, 2 EARs have not set up operational exchange methods with their partner banks and do not have a real exchange of data with these banks. And that’s not all. No risk classification automation tool has been implemented or is in the process of being implemented for the 5 EAR audited. Following these results, the ACAPS announces a project of sanctions against 2 EAR and a post-mission follow-up for the 3 others.
With regard to the audited insurance intermediaries, it appears that 37% do not have internal documents formalizing AML/CFT procedures. The majority of the IAs inspected declare that they were not aware of the publication of the authority’s circular relating to the duty of vigilance. Moreover, 80% do not have an AML/CFT risk classification model. Moreover, for the transaction monitoring system, which is dependent on the existence of AML/CFT procedures and a classification of operational risks, the majority of controlled intermediaries do not meet these two criteria.
Concerning the mechanism for reporting suspicions (DS), 87% of the IAs checked do not have access to the UTRFNET platform and none of the intermediaries carried out a DS. Thus, the authority decided on sanctions against 6 insurance intermediaries, in addition to post-mission monitoring for the 10 others.
Automation of risk classification
Finally, it should be noted that at the end of this mission, ACAPS also made recommendations. For the EAR, it recommends in particular to allocate more human resources dedicated to AML/CFT compliance. It also recommends involving the internal audit structure as the 3rd line of defense to ensure the assessment and implementation of AML/CFT procedures. ACAPS also asks the companies concerned to set up a tool for automating risk classification, making it possible to classify the EAR client portfolio in real time. It also calls for speeding up the automation of filtering in relation to the lists of sanctions and PPE.
For intermediaries, the regulator calls for formalizing the procedures governing the AML/CFT system within the firm and circulating them to all staff, ensuring their application. The authority also invites them to define the roles and responsibilities of employees in terms of vigilance and internal monitoring. It also recommends designating an ANRF (National Financial Intelligence Authority) correspondent and subscribing to the ANRFNET (formerly UTRFNET) platform relating to suspicious transaction reports. At the KYC level, ACAPS recommends that IAs ensure the reliable and exhaustive collection of identification and knowledge information relating to customers, according to a risk-based approach. Finally, it encourages them to organize training and awareness sessions for the benefit of employees to make them aware of their obligations of vigilance and internal monitoring.