ITALY/TERROR FINANCE: NEW POLICY RELIES ON LEGAL

C O N F I D E N T I A L ROME 000190 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 02/05/2018 TAGS: EFIN IT KTFN PREL PTER UNSC SUBJECT: ITALY/TERROR FINANCE: NEW POLICY RELIES ON LEGAL PROCEDURES TO JUSTIFY DE-LISTING DECISIONS REF: A. SECSTATE 11493 ¶B. ROMA 2143 ¶C. SECSTATE 8902 ¶D. SECSTATE 7433 Classified By: Econ Counselor William R. Meara for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) Summary: In response to a US request, the GOI will not reveal to Italian National Nada the US decision to oppose his de-listing at the 1267 committee. The GOI repeated its request to be informed of the US position on the de-listing case of Himmat, a colleague of Nada's, before the March 12 deadline. Highlighting difficulties Italy may face in future de-listing cases, an MFA official said the Financial Security Committee (FSC - the GOI's terrorist financing policy making body) cannot oppose de-listing requests on Italian nationals without an active judicial case or prosecution. This position could weaken Italy's cooperation with the USG on de-listing cases at the 1267 Committee. End Summary. ¶2. (C) On February 6, Econoff provided MFA Counterterrorism Officer Stefania Fancello the US response to Italy's 1267 de-listing questions (reftel A). Fancello stated that Italy would respect the USG's views and would not tell Nada that the US opposed his UN Focal Point de-listing request. Fancello asked to be informed of the US position regarding the de-listing of Himmat before the March 12 deadline. ¶3. (C) Econoff asked Fancello to explain how the FSC determines Italy's position on pending 1267 de-listing requests. Fancello replied that in the case of Italian Nationals, Italy's FSC uses the same criteria outlined in EU Common Position 931 (para 4). If a judicial case is pending on the individual under review, the GOI will support keeping that individual on the 1267 list. However, as occurred in the case of Nasreddin (a third colleague of Nada's who was de-listed in November 2007),once the Judge had completed his review and found that national authorities were unable to take legal action, Italy could no longer act to keep him on the 1276 list. (Note: They could, however, lobby other nations to stop the de-listing procedure, reftel B.) Previously, when Nada's petition came before the UN Focal Point in summer 2007, a Milan magistrate was reviewing his case and Italy could (and did) oppose his de-listing. Now that the Magistrate ruled that the GOI could not prosecute Nasreddin, Nada and Himmat, Fancello said, the FSC is hard pressed to justify actions to keep the three individuals on the 1267 list. Highlighting that Italian authorities lack the ability to sanction individuals through an executive authority, she said the FSC relies on judicial proceedings to validate their actions. She added, now that Nada is appealing to the GOI through the FSC to ask the Focal Point to review his case, the GOI may be obligated to table Nada's de-listing petition to the 1267 Committee, because they have no judicial case to ground a decision denying his petition. ¶4. (C) Fancello predicted that the absence of active court cases on individuals suspected of terrorism will cause future headaches for EU and US policy makers and added that other EU nations follow a similar policy. Terrorist organizations, she said, will likely use the court system in an attempt to repeal UN sanctions and she noted that the EU court of appeals is already reviewing EU sanctions cases. Fancello suggested that this topic be explored at the next US/EU bilateral discussions on terrorist financing. ¶5. (C) Ministry of Finance Financial Crimes Prevention Chief Roberto Ciciani told Econoff on January 30 that the GOI would review pending 1267 names (reftels C and D),but had no substantive comment. On the margins of meeting, Ciciani made clear that the GOI wants to maintain a solid US-Italy partnership on terrorist finance matters, even if the FSC forwards another request to de-list Nada in the 1267 Committee. Ciciani said the FSC would likely tell Nada, in response to his pending petition, that the GOI will follow procedures outlined in the 1267 "Guidelines for the Committee For the Conduct of its Work," Section 8 "De-Listing," paragraph "e." Ciciani said they will tell Nada they are currently operating under step "i - consultations" and that they will follow the course of action as outlined by the 1267 Committee. Ciciani added that they will advise Nada to conduct research on his legal status in other countries to determine if he is subject to additional multilateral or national sanctions. ¶6. (C) Comment: While the case of Nasreddin has been a thorn in the side of US/GOI CT Finance cooperation for some time, the legal implications are just becoming apparent. If Italy (and potentially other EU countries) can justify the continued presence of its own nationals on the 1267 List only through a court case, the process will become much more complicated and drawn out. In practice, we can keep someone like Nada on the 1267 list without Italian support, but the Italian position could erode GOI/US cooperation on the 1267 Committee and will likely isolate the US further. If we want to maintain Italian support, we will need to share more information on the individuals in question, particularly if it could help the Italians open legal proceedings. End comment. SPOGLI