Asantehene named in £350,000 money laundering case in UK
To the Asantehene, Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, handing someone a holdall
stuffed with more than £350,000 to deposit in a bank might seem nothing
out of the ordinary.
Indeed, when Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, the Asantehene, summoned Mark
Arthur to his multi million-pound residence in Henley-on-Thames in
London and handed him a bag containing almost £200,000 in sterling as
well as $200,000 in US currency with consecutive serial numbers, the
bank official felt it inappropriate to ask too many questions.
However, the subsequent deposit of the cash at Ghana International
Bank triggered a money laundering alert in the City of London and cost
Mr Arthur his job, reports The Telegraph.
The King, who once worked at Brent council, summoned Mr Arthur, the
bank’s second most senior executive, to his home in August last year.
Mr Arthur, from New Barnet, Hertfordshire, a dual citizen of the UK
and Ghana, drove to his own home with the cash and then took it in an
Uber taxi to the bank’s City offices for deposit in the king’s account,
he told an employment tribunal.
Osei Tutu II, the holder of a diplomatic passport, told him the cash
had been withdrawn from banks in Ghana and brought to the UK, he said in
his witness statement.
He had also instructed Mr Arthur to move $200,000 to an account at Standard bank in Jersey.
Mr Arthur, a member of the Ashanti tribe, the largest in Ghana, carried out the transfer within hours, the tribunal heard.
He was suspended and then sacked following the incident, after an
investigation by outside accountants Grant Thornton. He is claiming
wrongful dismissal, unfair dismissal and failure to protect a
whistleblower.
The bank said he had failed to follow anti-money laundering rules and
had violated security policies as it was only insured to carry cash by
armoured car up to a maximum of £250,000.
Mr Arthur, an executive director of the bank, alleged the deposit and
transfer were approved by Ghana International Bank’s chief executive,
Joseph Mensah.
Mr Mensah told an outside reviewer of Mr Arthur’s dismissal he “didn’t even have the authority to sanction such a huge amount”.
Osei Tutu II is estimated to be Africa’s 10th richest monarch, with
valuable goldmine and cocoa plantations and remains one of the most
influential traditional figures in Ghana.
In his witness statement, Mr Arthur said he was not able to follow
anti-money laundering rules when he accepted the cash because of the
king's status.
He said: “Without a policy to follow and did without wishing to
offend a sovereign of my country, I found myself in a very difficult
situation and one I had never been in before.
“I could not carry out the necessary due diligence by talking to His
Majesty so decided it would be best to verify the deposits at the bank
and to speak directly to Mr Mensah rather than disrespect His Majesty in
a face-to-face meeting.”
The day after the bank accepted the cash and made the transfer to
Jersey, it reported the transactions to the National Crime Agency as
suspicious.
News of Mr Arthur’s suspension was subsequently passed to the City
watchdogs the Prudential Regulation Authority and the Financial Conduct
Authority (FCA). The FCA sent inspectors into the bank who severely
criticised its handling of cash, the tribunal heard.
Lawyers
for Mr Arthur argued that his handling of the deposit was in line with
the way the bank previously handled Osei Tutu II’s account and that he
was aware that the king could travel on a diplomatic passport.
They cited a string of large cash deposits in 2013 and 2014 where the source of the funds was not properly recorded.
They cited a string of large cash deposits in 2013 and 2014 where the source of the funds was not properly recorded.
They
included a $100,000 that a review of the king’s account said came from a
fundraising event. There were no documents recording the source of that
cash, however.
Colin Millar, a building society chairman drafted in by Ghana
International Bank to adjudicate on Mr Arthur’s appeal against his
dismissal, rejected suggestions that the £350,000 holdall was acceptable
given the king’s history with the bank.
He told the tribunal the deposit and swift transfer offshore was a “classic” warning sign of money laundering.
Mr Millar told the hearing: “If you want to hide the sources of funds that are from a disreputable source then you move them around until it reaches the point where the authorities can’t trace them back to their original source. That’s a way of hiding the proceeds of crime.”
The hearing continues.
He told the tribunal the deposit and swift transfer offshore was a “classic” warning sign of money laundering.
Mr Millar told the hearing: “If you want to hide the sources of funds that are from a disreputable source then you move them around until it reaches the point where the authorities can’t trace them back to their original source. That’s a way of hiding the proceeds of crime.”
The hearing continues.
No comments
Your comments and Encouragement are welcome