A comparative analysis between the UK and the US AML legislations with reference to Saudi Arabia’s developing AML regime

Abstract

The United Kingdom (UK) and United States (US) Anti-Money Laundering (AML) legislations need to be improved in some respects. Furthermore, there is a lack of external reviews that examine the Saudi Arabian AM regime. Therefore, this study aims to address the weaknesses in the AML regimes in these countries and to suggest some remedies to enhance the law. This will be done by comparing the two robust systems, and then referencing Saudi Arabia to establish whether its laws are in line with them or not.

The research demonstrates that the UK and the US AML laws need to introduce some improvements. For instance, the US takes the list approach rather than the ‘all-crime’ approach with regard to the definition of predicate offences; this exposes the US to exploitation by money launderers. Moreover, the UK employs an ‘identification doctrine’ with regard to corporate criminal liability, which prevent it from criminally prosecuting companies. This is a barrier that needs to be considered. Hence, it is suggested that the UK and the US strengthen their AML laws.

After examining the regulations in the UK and the US, it is clear that Saudi Arabia in some ways is in line with the UK and US systems. Nonetheless, there are limited resources or evidence on the effectiveness of the Saudi laws in practice. Therefore, it is recommended that Saudi Arabia follows the UK and the US and conducts a regular assessment of their AML laws to develop the Saudi AML legislation.