Pak still poor on terror financing: FATF report

and technical compliance on 10 key issues, including investigation and prosecution of terror financing, preventive measures, financial sanctions, policy and coordination, and financial intelligence. The only exception was a “moderate” ranking for international cooperation.

The report said Pakistan had not taken “sufficient measures” to implement obligations under the UN’S 1267 Sanctions Committee against listed individuals and entities, “especially those associated with Lashkar-etayyiba (Let)/jamaat-ud-dawa (JUD), and Falah-i-insaniat Foundation (FIF) as well as the groups’ leader Hafiz Saeed”.

Though authorities had taken control of some properties of JUD and FIF, Pakistan didn’t demonstrate that it had “established effective asset management of this frozen property” and could not provide information about the prosecution of individuals associated with the property and “continued freezing actions against JUD, FIF and other regional terrorist networks”.

Contrary to Pakistan’s own assessment that terror financing poses a “medium” risk, the report concluded the country faces a “significant TF threat” and that the 228 registered cases and conviction of 58 people during 2015-18 “is not consistent with Pakistan’s overall level of TF risk”. It further concluded funds confiscated from terrorists – a total of 107,111 during 2015-18 – was “not commensurate” with the terror financing risk profile.

The report said the confiscated amount is “perceived as low in the context of Pakistan considering the high number of terrorist organisations operating within and at close proximity to the country”.

The report indicted Pakistan’s various anti-terror organisations and law enforcement agencies for failing to coordinate in taking action against terror groups. It stated that provincial counterterror departments have prosecuted all the terror financing cases while the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), the body probing t he Mumbai attacks, has not prosecuted any cases.

The report also backed India’s longstanding allegation that groups sanctioned by the UN’S 1267 Sanctions Committee, such as LET and JEM, are still raising funds with impunity.

“Several Un-listed organisations continue to operate openly in Pakistan, including holding fundraising events. Despite some positive recent actions taken by Pakistan since February 2018, it is clear that UNSCR 1267 is not being fully implemented,” it stated. The “continuing problems with domestic funding of terror groups and emerging TF risks from transnational terror groups is a continuing significant concern”, it added.

The report recommended that Pakistan “should enhance its understanding of the TF risks posed by Da’esh, AQ, JUD, FIF, LET, JEM, HQN, and persons affiliated with the Taliban”, and improve its action plan. as they are made from titanium alloy and weigh only 4,218kg, which is half the weight of conventional artillery guns deployed in the northern and eastern sectors.

The CH-47F (I) Chinook and the M777 howitzer are a deadly combination, said former Indian Air Force chief Air Chief Marshal Fali Major (retd). “The loadcarrying capacity of the Chinook and the capabilities that the M777 brings will certainly be a game-changer for the forces deployed along the eastern borders,” he said.

India ordered 15 Chinook helicopters from the US for $1.18 billion in September 2015. Six of them have already been delivered.

The army’s artillery arsenal in eastern Arunachal Pradesh includes the Bofors guns and the 105mm field gun. “Transporting these guns is quite tricky due to terrain and the infrastructure that is still a work in progress. It requires a lot of horse power and willpower,” said the first officer cited above.

The I AF pl ans t o deploy Us-made Apache AH-64E attack helicopters in the eastern sector in two years after a base there is fully ready to support the choppers, two senior IAF officers said on the condition of anonymity.

The helicopters are part of a $1.1-billion deal India inked with the US in September 2015 for 22 Apaches to modernise its assault capabilities to counter groundbased armoured targets and aerial threats.

The 22 Apaches will be split between Pathankot and Jorhat, where support infrastructure is being created. The IAF has already inducted eight Apaches into its fleet at the Pathankot airbase. models: one by the UN and another by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

OECD, a club of 33 advanced economies, defines EPR as a “policy approach under which producers are given a significant responsibility – financial or physical – for the treatment or disposal of post-consumer products”. Essentially, under EPR, producers of plastics or brands bear the responsibility for recycling or treating an amount of plastic that is equivalent to the total quantity they have sold in a given period, usually a year.

The UN and the European model, as the OCED framework i s o f t e n c a l l e d, l a ys down detailed mechanisms for countries to f r a me their EPR schemes. The UN framework refers to a manual for countries to adopt, which was updated during the so-called Basel Convention in 2016.

Both stress on the need for assigning, through national policy, “operational” as well as “financial responsibility” on producers for the plastic waste generated at the end of a product’s life cycle by setting targets. The European framework lays specific emphasis on “reducing the volume” or “toxicity of waste”, with the ultimate objective of “maximising social welfare”.

Industry associations in India say they are in the process of ramping up producer responsibility systems.

“The government has sought traceability of extended producer responsibility and proof. We have just announced a ~1000crore joint venture, known as Karo Sambhav (make possible), to carry out EPR. We will report back to the government,” said Vimal Kedia, the president of PET Packaging Association.

The PET Packaging Association counts among its members some of India’s biggest companies that use PET packaging, such as Coca-cola India Pvt Ltd, Dabur India Ltd and Reliance Industries Ltd, etc.

“We are expecting new EPR guidelines. We as an association

INDUSTRY ASSOCIATIONS IN INDIA SAY THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF RAMPING UP PRODUCER RESPONSIBILITY SYSTEMS.

have decided to undertake recycling or treating 30% of plastic sold and plan to increase it gradually,” said Deepak Ballani of the All India Plastic Manufacturers Association.

According to current rules, producers need to work out “modalities for waste collection system based on extended producers responsibility and involving state urban development departments, either individually or collectively, through their own distribution channel or through the local body concerned”.

Environmental experts say the Plastic Waste Management Rules 2016 do not lay down any enforceable EPR guidelines. “In fact, we were expecting EPR by October 2. We have submitted to the government our own model framework. The sooner we have the guidelines the better,” said Dinesh Raj Bandela of the Centre for Science and Environment.

EPR must have targets and be accounted for at the national level, Bandela said.

According to official data contained in a central advisory to states, India produces 9.4 million tonne of single-use plastic. However, according to the World Bank, India’s per capita consumption of plastic is still one of the lowest at 11kg a year, compared to a global average of 28kg.