- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
ED holds Amnesty India guilty in money laundering case
ED holds Amnesty India guilty in money laundering case
The Central Bureau of Investigation had filed an FIR against Amnesty International India Foundation Trust and others under IPC and FCRA
The Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has said in a statement, "We have filed a prosecution complaint under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, against Amnesty International India Pvt Ltd (AIIPL), Indians for Amnesty International Trust (IAIT), and others in a money laundering case."
The move comes a day after the adjudicating authority of the Enforcement Directorate upheld imposing a penalty of over Rs.61 crores against Amnesty India and its former head Aakar Patel. The central agency said it had filed the complaint against the organization for alleged money laundering in a separate case.
The case is based on an FIR filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against Amnesty International India Pvt Ltd (AIIPL), Indians for Amnesty International Trust (IAIT), Amnesty International India Foundation Trust (AIIFT), and others, under the Indian Penal Code and the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act (FCRA), 2010.
The charge sheet was filed in December last. Based on it, in April, Patel was prevented from flying to the US over a CBI lookout circular. He was to deliver a series of lectures.
The ED stated that in 2011-2012, AIIFT was granted permission under FCRA for receiving foreign contributions from Amnesty International UK. However, the permission/registration was subsequently revoked on receiving certain adverse inputs.
The agency said that the two entities, AIIPL and IAIT, were formed in the year 2013-2014 and 2012-2013, respectively, to "escape the FCRA route and received forex in the guise of Export of Services (EOS) and Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)."
It added that its probe revealed that after AIIFT's FCRA licence was cancelled, "a new method was adopted by Amnesty entities to receive money from abroad and Amnesty International, UK, sent Rs.51.72 crores to AIIPL.
The ED maintained that for export proceeds/advances received for the export of services to Amnesty International UK, there was no documentary proof including invoices and copies of the agreement between AIIPL and Amnesty International UK. So, no document was furnished by AIIPL to the authorized dealer banks.
The agency further said, "AIIPL and others have committed scheduled offence by claiming to be carrying out 'civil society work'. However, receiving forex in a profit-making company, thereby misutilizing the FDI, which is amply proved by the absence of any details/documents relating to exports made and layering of remittances received by AIIPL (a company) into IAIT (a charitable trust).
"Herein, both entities have acquired proceeds of crime and layered the same in the form of various movable properties," it added.
Meanwhile, the ED has issued two provisional orders for the attachment of movable properties worth Rs.19.54 crores.
The ED stated, "A prosecution complaint has been filed under PMLA against AIIPL and others in the court of the principal city civil and sessions judge, Bengaluru. The complaint has been taken into cognizance and the summons have been issued to all accused for their appearance before the court."