On July 17, 2019, the International Court of Justice (the Court) delivered a judgment in a very contentious case of a dispute between India and Pakistan, with a clear political overtone, finding, among other things, that Pakistan breached its obligations under Article 36, paragraph 1, of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (the Convention). The proceedings started on May 8, 2017 when the Government of India filed in the Registry of the Court an application instituting proceedings against Pakistan alleging violations of the Convention in the matter of the detention and trial of an Indian national, Mr. Kulbhushan Sudhir Jadhav, sentenced to death by a military court in Pakistan. On the same day, India submitted a request for the indication of provisional measures, referring to Article 41 of the Statute of the Court and to Articles 73, 74, and 75 of the Rules of Court. By an Order of May 18, 2017, the Court indicated the following provisional measures: “Pakistan shall take all measures at its disposal to ensure that Mr. Jadhav is not executed pending the final decision in these proceedings and shall inform the Court of all the measures taken in implementation of the present Order”.

On May 22, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed and remanded the dismissal of claims by victims of Sudanese genocide and ethnic cleansing brought against BNP Paribas for allegedly illegally transacting with sanctioned entities and actively trying to evade U.S. detention, thereby providing the regime access to U.S. financial markets. BNP Paribas and its subsidiaries (BNPP) were convicted of federal and state felonies arising from their evasion of U.S. sanctions on Sudan.  In pleading guilty, BNPP admitted their knowledge of the genocide and ethnic cleansing perpetrated by the Sudanese regime, as well as the consequences of providing the regime access to additional financial resources, which could be used to escalate the commission of the atrocities. Plaintiffs, victims of the Sudanese regime’s atrocities, sued BNPP under New York tort law, alleging that BNPP conspired with and aided and abetted the Sudanese regime in its commission of widespread atrocities.

On June 11, 2019, the United Nations Security Council adopted resolution 2474 (2019), its first resolution to deal specifically with persons reported missing during armed conflict.  The Council condemned “the deliberate targeting of civilians or other protected persons in situations of armed conflict, and call[ed] upon all parties to armed conflict to put an end to such practices.” The Council asked such parties “to take all appropriate measures, to actively search for persons reported missing, to enable the return of their remains, and to account for persons reporting missing without adverse distinction and to put in place appropriate channels enabling response and communication with families on the search process.”

On June 20, 2019, the UK Court of Appeal (Civil Division) delivered a judgment ruling that ministers had acted unlawfully in allowing the sale of weapons when there was a clear possibility they might be used in violation of international humanitarian law in Yemen. In this ruling, a panel of the Court of Appeal judges, including Sir Terence Etherton, the master of the rolls, Lord Justice Irwin, and Lord Justice Singh, did not strictly prohibit the government from issuing new licenses but made clear that they felt it had fallen short of its duties. Ministers had failed “in one significant respect,” the judges said, by failing to determine whether the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen had violated international law. The Lords held that the consequence of allowing an appeal on one ground will be that “the matter will be remitted to the Secretary of State to reconsider in accordance with the correct legal approach.”

Two conflicting decisions have been issued with respect to the suits against United States President Donald Trump for violating the emoluments clause. On July 10, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit unanimously granted the President’s petition for a writ of mandamus and reversed the district court’s orders, concluding the District of Columbia and the State of Maryland lacked standing to sue. On June 25, 2019, U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan denied a request by President Trump to put the emoluments case against him on hold.

On July 12, 2019, the United States extradited to Colombia Andres Felipe Arias Leiva, the Colombia Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development from 2005 to 2009. He is set to serve a sentence of 209 months in prison after a 2014 conviction by the Supreme Court of Colombia for two offenses committed while in public office. In 2014, Arias fled to the U.S. after his conviction.  Once in Florida, he hired an immigration attorney and applied for asylum.  He claimed that the corruption charges were politically motivated and that he had not received a fair trial.

On July 8, 2019, the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office filed criminal charges against Subhash Kapoor, an art dealer – once based in New York – accusing him of running an art smuggling ring valued at $145 million. The complaint filed argues that Kapoor garnered rare, exquisite pieces from countries including India, Afghanistan, and Thailand. In acquiring these items, Kapoor created fake paper trails to make his efforts appear legitimate, crafting documents like fraudulent invoices and import forms. Finally, he would sell these pieces to buyers from around the world, which typically involved collectors, art dealers, and museums. In one case, for example, the complaint details how the smuggling ring – which included Kapoor and seven conspirators – stole a statue of the goddess Uma Parameshvari from a religious temple in India. The ring smuggled it to Hong Kong, then London, where it underwent restoration, to ultimately be sold for $2.5 million in New York.

On July 5, 2019, during the 26^th Plenary of the Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) in the Hague, the UN Secretary-General’s Special Advocate for Inclusive Finance for Development (USGSA), her Majesty Queen Máxima of the Netherlands, opened the plenary meeting alongside the Dutch Minister of Justice and Security, Mr. Ferdinand Grapperhaus.  Both focused on the crucial role FIUs play in protecting global financial stability, and the necessity of public-public collaboration in the AML/CFT environment, as well as the importance of financial inclusion as a key factor in the prevention of ML/TF risks.  The UNSGSA underscored that financial inclusion, financial integrity, and financial stability are not only complementary, but also mutually reinforce each other. Mrs. Hennie Verbeek-Kusters, the Head of FIU- the Netherlands and Egmont Group, Chair, presided over the plenary alongside the newly elected Egmont Group Chair, Mariano Federici, President of UIF Argentina.

On June 19-21, 2019, FATF President Marshall Billingslea of the United States chaired the third and last Plenary meeting under the U.S. Presidency in Orlando, Florida. The delegates discussed the following issues, including FATF initiatives under the U.S. Presidency of the FATF. In October 2018, in response to the increasing use of virtual assets for money laundering and terrorist financing, the FATF amended Recommendation 15 and the glossary to clarify to which businesses and activities the FATF requirements apply in the case of virtual assets. In its Resolution 2462 of March 28, 2019, the UN Security Council welcomed these and other continuing efforts by FAFT to address the regulation and supervision of virtual asset activities and virtual asset service providers. After a public consultation on the measures applicable to virtual asset transfers, the FATF has issued the Interpretative Note to Recommendation (INR) 15, which applies in detail the FATF Standards and binding measures for the regulation and supervision of virtual asset activities and service providers. INR 15 sets binding measures relevant for both countries and virtual asset service providers and other obliged entities that engage in or provide virtual asset products and services in order to establish a more level playing field across the virtual asset ecosystem.

In court testimony on July 4, 2019, Sergio Cabral, the former governor of Rio de Janeiro, said he paid $2 million to buy votes so that Rio would be chosen to host the 2016 Olympic Games. Cabral told Judge Marcelo Bretas that Carlos Nuzman, then the chair of the Brazilian Olympic Committee, was in charge of the negotiations.  In 2017, Brazilian authorities arrested Nuzman during an investigation into the alleged bribery scheme.  He denies wrongdoing. Cabral testified the payment produced a promise that between six and nine members of the International Olympic Committee would vote in favor of holding the 2016 Olympics in Rio. Cabral testified that Lamine Diack, former chief of the International Association of Athletics Federations, and his son Papa asked for payments of $1.5 million and $500,000 respectively.  Papa Diack has characterized the allegations as “the biggest lie in the history of world sport.” French authorities arrested Lamine Diack in 2015, accusing him of receiving payments for deferring sanctions against Russian Olympic performers who used drugs to enhance their performances.  He has denied wrongdoing.