Explained: FATF, Pakistan and the ‘Grey List’

Here is a quick overview of the FATF categorisation and Pakistan’s chequered history with the inter-governmental group.

This explainer, first published on February 21, 2020, when Pakistan originally received a reprieve of four months, is being republished with additional information on October 24, 2020, when Pakistan was given more months on the ‘grey list’ by FATF.

New Delhi: Pakistan may have avoided being bumped upwards into a ‘black list’ by the global terror financing watchdog, but it remains on the ‘grey list’ of countries which have deficiencies in the anti-money laundering and counter terror financing regime.

After a three-day plenary, FATF announced on Friday (October 23) that Pakistan remained on the ‘grey list’ and had time till February 2021 to fully implement the “Action Plan’. Out of the 27 action points, Pakistan has, so far, fully met the standards of 21 points.

Here is a quick overview of the FATF categorisation and Pakistan’s chequered history with the inter-governmental group.

Why was this FATF meeting significant?

From October 21, officials from around 205 countries, jurisdictions and other countries started the first ever virtual FATF plenary meeting for 2020 in Paris. Every year, there are three plenary meetings of the inter-governmental body tasked with rooting out money laundering and terror financing by plugging loops holes in the international financial system.

For India, FATF has become an important measure to put pressure on Pakistan to dismantle the infrastructure that supports cross-border attacks.

The virtual meeting was also taking place after a gap of eight months, as the June plenary was cancelled due to coronavirus pandemic.

What are the ‘black’ and ‘grey’ lists?

These two terms actually do not exist in official FATF terminology. The group does identify “jurisdictions with weak measures” through two public documents issued at the end of the plenary held thrice a year.

The first is the FATF’s “public statement’, that lists two set of countries. The first one which is colloquially known as a ‘black list’, is for “countries or jurisdictions with such serious strategic deficiencies that the FATF calls on its members and non-members to apply counter-measures”. This ‘black list’ category has a small group which is less stringent – and only calls on   its members to apply enhanced due diligence measures proportionate to the risks arising from the deficiencies associated with the country”. 

The second public document “Improving Global AML/CFT Compliance: On-going process” is the ‘grey list.  

Also read: After Erdogan Supports Pakistan on Kashmir, India Asks Turkey Not to Interfere

These list countries that have a “strategic weakness” in their regime to counter money laundering and terror financing. Once listed as ‘jurisdiction under increased monitoring’ by FATF, they will have to complete an action plan within a certain time period. FATF does not ask its members to take additional “due diligence” measures against the ‘grey list countries”, but encourages states “to take into account the information presented below in their risk analysis”.

The FATF plenary session in progress. Photo: Twitter/@FATFNews

Why was Pakistan put on the FATF ‘grey list’?

Pakistan had first figured in a FATF statement after the plenary of February 2008. At that time, FATF had noted Pakistan’s recent progress in adopting anti-money laundering legislation but urged financial institutions to be aware of the “remaining deficiencies” that could constitute a vulnerability in the international financial system.

Pakistan gave a “high level” commitment in June 2010 that it would work with FATF and Asia Pacific Group, the regional FATF-like body, to sort out these differences. But, it continued to not demonstrate enough progress to be taken out of the grey list even in October 2011.

The FATF public statement of February 2012 listed Pakistan among countries who have “Jurisdictions with strategic AML/CFT deficiencies that have not made sufficient progress in addressing the deficiencies or have not committed to an action plan developed with the FATF to address the deficiencies”. A senior minister in then Nawaz Sharif government and opposition leader Khawaja Asif described this move as a “black list”.

The FATF’s main concern was that Pakistan did not have appropriate legislation to identify terror financing, as well as, confiscate terrorist assets. Pakistan went out of the Public Statement to the second statement of “Improving public compliance” from June 2014, which noted that the country had made “significant progress”.

Within nine months, Pakistan was “no longer subject to the FATF’s monitoring process under its on-going global AML/CFT compliance process”.

Also read: Pakistan’s Army Continues to Mollycoddle Terrorists and Hound its Critics

After three years, Pakistan was back on the ‘grey list’ in June 2018. The FATF press release indicated that the ‘action plan’ should largely look at plugging the holes in terror financing and activities of UN-designated terrorists.

The action plan submitted by Pakistan has 27 points, including full implementation of that targeted financial sanctions against all UN-designated terrorists.

Was there politics behind Pakistan going back on the ‘grey list’ in June 2018?

The US had spearheaded the move that led to the FATF plenary to first propose that Pakistan be assigned to the ‘grey list’ in three months.

In the run-up to the June 2018 plenary, Pakistan did take some steps like amending the anti-terrorism act and clamping down on affiliates of Jamaat-ud-Dawa, a UN-designated terror group.

At the same time, JUD leader Hafiz Saeed, who is the key mastermind of the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, was allowed to enter the political mainstream, with his political wing contesting seats in the parliamentary elections.

While foreign ministries insist that the FATF is a technical body, geo-politics does play a role, with countries using the money laundering watchdog as diplomatic leverage.

“Bottom line is that FATF’s grey listing of Pakistan should not be looked at in isolation but placed in the larger picture of US-Pakistan relations that have had many ups and downs,” asserted an article in Pakistani newspaper Dawn.

In the run-up to the February 2008 decision, the US had weaned Saudi Arabia away, leaving only China and Turkey supporting Pakistan. China eventually withdrew its objection. A few days later, India publicly congratulated China for its election as vice president of FATF, lending credence to the suspicion that a deal had been reached behind closed doors.

What has happened since Pakistan was put on the ‘grey list’ in 2018?

Since June 2018, all the FATF plenaries have retained Pakistan on the grey list. However, it was not enough to be brought out of the ‘grey list’. But, it was sufficient that Pakistan could not be bumped up to the FATF public statement which, with China, Turkey and Malaysia backing Islamabad.

Also read: FATF Arm Finds ‘Critical Gaps’ in Pakistan’s Actions Against Terror Groups

Pakistan raised the pitch that the FATF had been politicised, with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan stating that India wanted to destroy Pakistani economy. China has also stated that there were “political designs” behind “some countries which want to include Pakistan in the blacklist”.

Pakistan PM Imran Khan addresses the 74th session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York, US, September 27, 2019. Photo: Reuters/Lucas Jackson

Ahead of the FATF’s October 2019 plenary, the Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering, after considering Pakistan’s Mutual Evaluation Report, found critical gaps in Islamabad’s reforms to curb the flow of funds to proscribed terror groups like Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Lashkar-e-Toiba.

Indian defence minister Rajnath Singh had claimed that the FATF would “blacklist Pakistan anytime” – which was seized on by Pakistan’s foreign minister as an example of the politicisation of the body. Since then, statements by Indian political leaders about FATF have been relatively rare.

In October 2019, Pakistan had fully met only five out of the 27 action points. But, it managed to avoid the ‘black list’ and was given a reprieve till February 2020.

Pakistan managed to deliver on 14 out of 27 action points by February this year, which allowed FATF to give it a grace period of four months to fully implement the Action Plan. 

With COVID-19 becoming a full-fledged pandemic, the June plenary was cancelled and Pakistan got a reprieve of four months till October. Last month, Pakistan government convened a joint session of parliament and passed over a dozen legislations that would upgrade the country’s legal mechanism to meet FATF standards. At the time of the October 2020 meeting – the first virtual plenary in FATF – Pakistan had complied with 21 out of 27 action points. 

Why does Pakistan remain on the grey list? Will it ever be ‘blacklisted’?

It is highly unlikely that Pakistan would ever join North Korea and Iran in the FATF public statement. As evident from the composition of the ‘black list’, the US would have to show a strong push to put Pakistan in the top tier of countries whose financial regimes face isolation from the international system.

Two days before the FATF plenary began, the US Principal Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asia, Alice G. Wells had praised Pakistan for convicting Hafiz Saeed and his associate as an important step “in meeting its international commitments to combat terrorist financing”. India had, however, termed the conviction of Saeed as an ‘eyewash’.

With the US currently in the midst of the final leg of a peace deal with the Taliban, Washington may not have been too eager to push Islamabad, especially since Pakistan’s economy was already in deep doldrums.

However, Pakistan, despite support from countries like Turkey, Malaysia and China, had not made enough progress to also exit the grey list, as per various technical evaluations.

However, it has got extensions in the last three plenary meetings in October 2019, February 2020 and October 2020. This is because it managed to steadily increase the number of action plan points that it has fully implemented. “As long as we see a country is progressing in action items, and we have seen progress with Pakistan, we give them a chance to repair the outstanding issues,” FATF president Marcus Pleyer told reporters on October 24.

To exit the ‘grey list’, Pakistan will have to tell the FATF member states that it has completed the Action Plan. Once a FATF onsite investigation team verifies Islamabad’s Action Plan implementation, then the decks will cleared for Pakistan to finally leave the ‘grey list’.

How Pakistan’s Unregulated Economy Feeds the Criminal Terror Nexus

Rising above the exultation from Pakistan’s continued categorisation as ‘grey’ on the FATF, it is crucial to identify ways to effectively dent its militant economy.

At the ongoing Financial Action Task Force (FATF) plenary in Paris, Pakistan’s case was up for review and it was retained on the ‘grey list’ failure to fully comply with global Anti-Money Laundering/Combating Financing of Terrorism (AML/CTF) standards. Pakistan has been under FATF observation for eleven years now, having been placed on the grey list first in 2012, and subsequently again in 2018.

Although the case for ‘black listing’ Pakistan for its flagrant violation of FATF standards has been strong, with support from three nations, China, Turkey and Malaysia, this has been an arduous diplomatic struggle for India. Any country under review requires only three votes to keep if off the ‘black list’ and 12 votes to take it off the grey list.

In June 2018, the FATF granted Pakistan 15 months to implement an appropriate legislative framework to identify, freeze and confiscate terrorist assets. At the end of that timeframe in October 2019, a regional grouping of the FATF, the Asia Pacific Group stated in its Mutual Evaluation Report (MER) that Pakistan was ‘Compliant’ for 1 and ‘Largely Compliant’ for 9 of the forty global AML/CTF Recommendations.

Despite this severe analysis of Pakistan’s financial structure, aggressive lobbying by the country made enough progress for it to be considered for removal from the grey list. In fact, there was speculation until the last hour that Pakistan might even get ‘white listed’ with support from certain European nations in addition to its traditional allies.

Staged for the sake of the FATF review, international security analysts witnessed the recurring drama of global terrorist Hafiz Saeed’s conviction. Pakistan also tried to keep under wraps, the reoccupation of the infamous Lal Masjid by radical Islamic preacher Maulana Abdul Aziz on February 6. Soon after followed the brazen escape of Ehsanullah Ehsan, the former spokesman of the Pakistani Taliban militant group, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) from the custody of security agencies – events which clearly demonstrated Pakistan’s failure as a state to take effective counter-extremism measures.

Also read: Explained: FATF, Pakistan and the ‘Grey List’

Pakistan has been providing weak and misleading statistical evidence in its defence at the FATF reviews. Several indexes by the international organisations rank Pakistan as one of the worst countries in terms of a poor AML/CFT strategy. Significant money laundering (ML) predicates in the country include tax evasion, corruption, trade in counterfeit goods, narcotics trafficking, and terrorist financing (TF).

Pakistan is still not qualified for membership to the Egmont Group, an informal network of 164 financial intelligence units (FIUs), which provides a forum for the exchange of financial intelligence and expertise to check ML/TF.

The FATF plenary in Paris, on February 19. Photo: Twitter/@FATFNews

Unregulated economy

Focus on anti-money laundering measures by banks in Pakistan is scarce because it is encouraged by the government – foreign remittances and wire transfers remain the safest and most popular instrument of laundering money in Pakistan. The regular tax amnesty schemes are abused by shady elements to legalise their unreported assets.

Pakistan’s tax-exempted areas erstwhile Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) and Provincially Administered Tribal Areas (PATA), serve as covers for illegal money, which are masked as proceeds of income from businesses carried out there. Despite their merger with the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) province, they are exempt from paying any income tax, customs duty on cars, sales tax, and agriculture income tax.

The Afghan Transit trade is also manipulated to source illegal finances. In one incident, expensive boating equipment meant for high seas was booked through this transit trade ignoring the fact that Afghanistan is a country without any sea. A significant share of terror financing (TF) in Pakistan emanates from donations to “charitable” organisations which divert funds to militant groups, or through direct donations to such groups.

Funds are mostly transferred through Informal Value Transfer Systems (IVTSs). Despite claims to the contrary, even in the future, Pakistan will be unable to control the more pernicious uses of IVTS transactions as it is widespread with only about 14% of adults having access to a formal financial institution. A majority of Pakistanis still use informal financial access such as committees, hawala/hundi money transfers, and so forth.

Also read: Pakistan’s Army Continues to Mollycoddle Terrorists and Hound its Critics

Money laundering and terror financing in Pakistan

The unregulated financial structure of Pakistan further feeds the criminal terror nexus because of the illicit methods that money launderers use to disguise the sources of their ill-gotten wealth, thus effectively sponsoring terrorism. The MER has clearly stated that neither the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) nor the Securities & Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) has a clear understanding of the ML and TF risks unique to the sectors it supervises. It is wishful to imagine that in a span of three months these financial institutions would have not only comprehended the scale of the ML/TF  threats but also implemented measures to contain the same.

For counter-terror efforts to be effective in the longer term, it is crucial to effectively dent the militant economy, by tracing the financial mechanisms of funding used by militants, neutralising those sources, and preventing banned outfits from raising funds domestically or internationally. An estimate of the scale of terrorism financing in Pakistan is difficult as it “does not demonstrate a proper understanding of the TF risks posed by Da’esh, Al qaeda (AQ), Jamaat-ud-Daawa (JuD) and Fatah-e-Insaniat (FiF), Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), Haqqani Network (HQN), and persons affiliated with the Taliban”.

There have been very few convictions for money laundering, and terrorist financing in Pakistan. With only 49 convictions in Punjab and a dismal nine in the rest of the country, convictions have certainly not been consistent with province-specific terror financing risks. Further, information on the sentences handed down with these convictions was not provided by Pakistan.

Pakistan hasn’t made the institutional changes it needs to seriously tackle TF. Evidence suggests that security agencies have no intention of breaking ties with terror groups like the LeT, which are effectively their assets, particularly against India. UN-designated terrorist Hafiz Saeed has been leading an unrestricted life in Pakistan, notwithstanding the periodic staging of his arrest by Pakistani authorities. His recent conviction was only spurred by an urgency to deflect a negative review in Paris. A term of five years for the terrorist who masterminded of the 2008 Mumbai attacks that killed more than 160 people hardly qualifies as a fitting conviction.

Also read: Pakistan’s Pashtun Rights Movement is Alive and Kicking

JeM ‘chief’ Maulana Masood Azhar, the architect of the Pulwama attack operates freely within Pakistan but has been missing of late. In an interview, former President Pervez Musharraf admitted that JeM was a terror outfit and the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), had used it to carry out attacks in India during his tenure. Meanwhile, the notoriously radical students of the Jamia Hafsa seminary, have barricaded themselves inside the Lal Masjid. In 2014, this seminary had pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, “caliph” of the Islamic State. The centre of radical Islamic learning Lal Masjid acts as a ‘watering hole’ for militant groups, like LeT, JeM among others.

In July 2019, demonstrating incredulous inconsistency, as Pakistan’s National Counter Terrorism Authority Pakistan (NACTA) listed 7,600 individuals in Schedule IV of the Anti-Terrorism Act, during an event in the US, Prime Minister Imran Khan claimed that there were 30-40 thousand terrorists in Pakistan. NACTA’s list of proscribed persons has now been reduced to 6600, with no explanation available as to how nearly a thousand persons were removed from Schedule IV.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan speaks during a session at the 50th World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, January 22, 2020. Photo: Reuters/Denis Balibouse

Pakistan has become quite adept at showcasing superficial actions against proscribed groups and their front organisations, every time it is due for scrutiny by FATF. The only reason that it is concerned about the listing is that any further downgrading would mean no more bailouts by the World Bank or the IMF.

Keeping Pakistan on the ‘grey list’

FATF’s continued categorisation of Pakistan on the ‘grey list’ springs from the fact that it has consistently failed to implement local legislation to comply with the relevant UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions.  Several terrorist groups operating from within Pakistan figure in the consolidated sanctions list generated by the UNSC under resolution 1566.

Also read: FATF Arm Finds ‘Critical Gaps’ in Pakistan’s Actions Against Terror Groups

A sanctions regime against Pakistan remains the best deterrent against the activities of the UN-designated terrorists that are operating from Pakistani soil. Consider the case of the LeT which has confined its activities albeit to maintain deniability and avoid international scrutiny and outfits. This amply signifies its ties to the Pakistan military which desires to avoid confrontation with India at the present juncture. There is a danger that the present downward trend in terror activities might inaccurately be perceived as a result of genuine action against terrorism by Pakistan.

Although India has revoked Pakistan’s “most favoured nation” trading status, since the bilateral trade only amounts to around US2 billion, this has failed to make a dent. For sanctions to have a significant effect, India will need to persuade powerful economic actors, especially the EU which is Pakistan’s biggest trading partner.

By sidestepping structural and procedural gaps in AML/CTF legislative framework Pakistan has been making a mockery of the FATF procedures. This time around the inter-governmental body has granted Pakistan four months before it undertakes another review of its performance.

In the end, rising above the exultation of Pakistan’s continued categorisation as ‘grey’ on the FATF, the real challenge is to reach a universally consistent mindset of countering terrorism by deconstructing terrorism. There is ample empirical evidence showing that terrorism financing and recruitment promote terrorist attacks. Economic sanctions should become a primary means to fight state-sponsored terrorism, not just an afterthought.

Vaishali Basu has worked as a consultant with the National Security Council Secretariat (NSCS) for several years. She is, at present, associated with the think tank Policy Perspectives Foundation. 

Pakistan Once Again Avoids FATF’s ‘Black List’

The decision was announced at the end of the plenary of the FATF, chaired by China in Paris on Friday.

New Delhi: Pakistan remains on the ‘grey list’ of the money-laundering watchdog Financial Action Task Force and has avoided the ‘black list’ for another four months, despite meeting only about half of its action plan.

The decision was announced at the end of the plenary of the FATF, chaired by China in Paris on Friday.

Pakistan was put on the ‘grey list’ in June 2018, with time given till October 2019 to implement a 27-point Action plan to address its “strategic counter-terrorist financing-related deficiencies”. At the October plenary, FATF observed that Pakistan should “swiftly complete its full action plan by February 2020”.

Four months later, the February plenary also gave a reprieve to Pakistan. In similar language, FATF “strongly urges Pakistan to swiftly complete its full action plan by June 2020”.

In October last year, Pakistan had implemented only about five out of the 27 points in the action plan. This has increased to 14, which is perhaps the reason that FATF also observed that Pakistan has made “recent and notable improvements”.

However, just like in October, FATF also stated that “all deadlines in the action plan have expired”.

Also read: Explained: FATF, Pakistan and the ‘Grey List’

In identical phrasing as from the last plenary, FATF also stated that if Pakistan did not make “significant and sustainable progress” by the next plenary, FATF will “take action which could include the FATF calling on its members and urging all jurisdiction to advise their FIs to give special attention to business relations and transactions with Pakistan”.

China was the first to welcome the FATF decision. It described the avoidance of ‘black list’ as a consequence of Pakistan’s “enormous efforts in improving its CTF regime, which has been recognised by the majority”.

Pakistan getting a reprieve from the ‘black list’ was not unexpected. In the run-up to the plenary meeting this week, the US had praised Pakistan for meeting its international commitments of combating terror financing by convicting the Jamaat-ud-Daawa chief Hafiz Saeed.

So far, there has been no public response from India on Pakistan remaining on the ‘grey list’.

Hafiz Saeed Conviction: US Welcomes ‘Important Step Forward’, India Dubious

Indian government sources expressed scepticism about the “efficacy” of the decision since it was made on the eve of the plenary meeting of the Financial Action Task Force.

New Delhi: A day after a Pakistani court sentenced Mumbai terror attack accused Hafiz Saeed to 11 years for terror financing, India expressed scepticism about the “efficacy” of the decision since it was made on the eve of the plenary meeting of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), while the US welcomed it as an “important step forward”.

On Wednesday, Jamat-ud-Dawa (JuD) chief Saeed was sentenced to 11 years in jail by an anti-terrorism court in Pakistan in two terror financing cases. These are not, however, related to the Mumbai terror attack conspiracy cases, which are currently stuck in legal quagmire.

The first response from the US was one of appreciation. “Today’s conviction of Hafiz Saeed and his associate is an important step forward – both toward holding LeT accountable for its crimes, and for #Pakistan in meeting its international commitments to combat terrorist financing,” said an initialled tweet on behalf of US state department’s principal deputy assistant secretary, bureau of South and Central Asian affairs, Alice G. Wells on Wednesday.

She also referred to Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan’s remarks that it was in the interest of his country to “not allow non-state actors to operate from its soil”.


While Washington welcomed the court decision, Indian officials expressed scepticism about the sustainability of the process, inferring that Pakistan only took a tough step ahead of the next plenary meeting of the FATF, the international money laundering and terror funding watchdog.

Unlike the US, there was, however, no official response from India yet, with sources preferring to give their initial reaction on background.

Also Read: Not Blacklisted Yet, Pakistan Gets Final Reprieve From FATF, To Remain ‘Greylisted’ For 4 Months

Stating that it was part of a “long pending” obligation of Pakistan to “end support for terrorism”, government sources said, “The decision has been made on the eve of FATF Plenary meeting, which has to be noted. Hence, the efficacy of this decision remains to be seen.” India has, so far, remained consistently dubious about any visible steps taken by Pakistan against terror groups in the past few years.

The next plenary meeting of FATF will be held in Paris from February 16 to 23.

At the last meeting in October 2019, Pakistan which has been ‘grey listed’ for over an year, had got a final reprieve of four months to avoid being ‘blacklisted’ if it implemented reforms to prevent money laundering and terror. FATF had “strongly urge(d) Pakistan to swiftly complete its full action plan by February 2020”.

If there is no “significant and sustainable progress” across the “full range of its action plan” by February 2020, then the watchdog warned that actions could include directions to member nations to advise their financial institutions to “give special attention to business relations and transactions with Pakistan”.

Before the October 2019 plenary, Pakistan’s mutual evaluation report by the Asia Pacific Group, the regional affiliate of FATF, was made public. It showed that there were critical gaps in Pakistan’s efforts to curb flow of funds and restrict activities of proscribed terror groups like JuD and Lashkar-e-Taiba.

Meanwhile, Indian officials were also sceptical whether Pakistan would take steps against other terror groups. “It remains to be seen whether Pakistan would take action against other all terrorist entities and individuals operating from territories under its control, and bring perpetrators of cross border terrorist attacks, including in Mumbai and Pathankot to justice expeditiously,” said government sources.