TERRORIST FINANCE - OTTAWA: GOC RESPONSE ON

S E C R E T OTTAWA 001181 SIPDIS STATE FOR EB/ESC/ESP (GLASS),S/CT (FOX),IO/PHO (PEREZ), AND WHA/CAN TREASURY FOR GENERAL COUNSEL (DAVID AUFHAUSER),OFAC DIRECTOR (NEWCOMB),TREASURY DAS FOR TERRORISM (ZARATE), AND TREASURY TASK FORCE ON TERRORIST FINANCING NSC FOR PETERS JUSTICE FOR BETSY BORKE, OFFICE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS/CRIMINAL DIVISION E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/03/2013 TAGS: EFIN ETTC PTER PREL CA SUBJECT: TERRORIST FINANCE - OTTAWA: GOC RESPONSE ON TARGETTING HEPI AND HCI REF: A. OTTAWA 1142 ¶B. STATE 101323 ¶C. OTTAWA 960 ¶D. STATE 79970 Classified By: Classified by Economics Minister Counselor Michael Galla gher. Reason 1.5 (b and d). ¶1. (U) Action request paragraph 3. ¶2. (SBU) Canada's Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade conveyed (by fax) the following response to our ref B demarche. The fax cover sheet requested that we advise the GOC of how we expect to proceed. Begin text of GOC response: -- Thank you for your visit of April 22, 2003 and for consulting with us on your anticipated next steps with respect to combatting terrorism financing. -- As you are aware, all of the individuals and entities, identified in your April demarche, are known to Canadian authorities. In fact, law enforcement investigations are ongoing. -- CANADA continues to weigh the merits of designating Canadians and entities based in Canada, as terrorist, under our legislation, against the effects that such designation would have on ongoing criminal investigations. -- At this time, we believe that a designation of the individuals and entities in question, by the United Sates or the UNSC 1267 Committee, would be deleterious to the ongoing law enforcement actions in Canada. -- We will continue to share information with you through established law enforcement and intelligence channels. End text. ¶3. (S) Embassy contacts explained unofficially that the GOC understands from recent conversations with DC counterparts that the proposed designation is a "housekeeping" measure designed to ensure that groups or individuals removed from the G-7 listing process in April, 2002, do not fall through the cracks. The GOC is under the impression that confirmation that they object to the designation due to ongoing investigations is sufficient to prevent USG designation of the proposed targets. ¶4. (S) Action request: Please let us know if this is not the case. If Washington intends to proceed with the designation, we will so advise the GOC. CELLUCCI