Mutual Evaluations

BACKGROUND ON MUTUAL EVALUATION WORKING GROUP

The APG Terms of Reference 2012 indicate that working groups may be formed to address the APG’s work between meetings. Members (and observers, if agreed by Working Group members) may participate in all APG Working Groups, Typologies Workshops and ad hoc committees established in response to specific issues.

Goal 3 in the APG Strategic Plan 2012-2016 is to assess and improve members’ compliance with the international AML/CFT standards.

The strategies to achieve this goal include:

  • Conduct the APG’s third round of mutual evaluations with the aim of assessing all members during the period of the APG’s mandate 2012 – 2020.
  • Provide assessment training for APG evaluators and for APG members undergoing evaluation.
  • Maintain APG mutual evaluation procedures which reflect best practice for AML/CFT assessments, including ensuring the quality and consistency of APG mutual evaluations.
  • Maintain and enhance mechanisms, including follow-up procedures and strategic implementation planning, to monitor action taken and improve compliance by evaluated APG members in response to their mutual evaluation reports.

The APG’s 2nd round of mutual evaluations was primarily coordinated by the APG Secretariat, with subsequent expert input in the latter years by an Expert Quality Control Group (EQCG) that assisted the Secretariat, evaluation teams, and evaluated members in finalising APG mutual evaluation reports (MERs). The EQCG had no decision making powers in relation to MERs, but acted as a source of advice for the Evaluation Team and Secretariat. The roles and functions of the EQCG were detailed in the APG’s 2nd Round Mutual Evaluation Procedures.

The APG Implementation Issues Working Group (IIWG) also played a key role in the 2nd round in developing revised ME follow-up procedures in 2010 and identifying implementation issues with core/key FATF Recommendations, i.e. R.1 (ML offence), SR.II and SRIII (TF offence and freezing), and also on R.31 on national coordination.

The APG Ad Hoc Working Group on FATF Issues, which was established in November 2010, assisted the Secretariat and APG members to better manage work associated with FATF issues and to encourage input by members into the FATF’s policy development process, in particular the review of the FATF Standards, as well as identifying training/implementation issues for members arising out of the review of the Standards.

Documents for Mutual Evaluations Working Group (MEWG) meetings are available to APG Members and Observers in the Documents area in the secure section of the website.

Purpose

The purpose of the APG Mutual Evaluation Working Group (the “ME Working Group”) is to:

  • Support the APG in implementing its 3rd round of mutual evaluations, including follow-up.
  • Support the APG in implementing its 2nd round mutual evaluation follow-up procedures.
  • Contribute to the development and implementation of procedures and mechanisms to help ensure quality and consistency in mutual evaluations, including follow-up.
  • Identify and report on implementation issues associated with the APG’s 3rd round of mutual evaluations and, to avoid potential duplication, liaise with the IIWG and the APG Donors and Providers (DAP) Group, as necessary.
  •  Develop synergies with the FATF’s Evaluations and Compliance Group (ECG)
  • Support the APG’s assessor training, pre-mutual evaluation training and training relating to the FATF Standards

Functions

The ME Working Group will:

3rd round of mutual evaluations – quality and consistency and follow-up

  • In accordance with the APG’s Third Round Mutual Evaluation Procedures (as updated from time to time), contribute to quality and consistency review of draft APG MERs against the FATF Assessment Methodology 2013 and MERs adopted under the APG’s 3rd round of mutual evaluations.
  • In accordance with the APG’s Third Round Mutual Evaluation Procedures, review and consider 3rd round mutual evaluation follow-up reports.
  • In accordance with the APG’s Third Round Mutual Evaluation Procedures, assist in identifying issues from draft mutual evaluation reports for discussion at Plenary.

2nd round mutual evaluation - follow-up

  • In accordance with the APG’s Second Round Mutual Evaluation Follow-Up Procedures, review 2nd round ME progress reports and analysis reports, including considering recommendations for the mode of follow-up to apply to members.

Implementation and training

  • Identify implementation issues contained in MERs and ME follow-up reports and draw them to the membership’s attention, as required.
  • Identify any mutual evaluation process or procedural issues and make recommendations to the membership for improvement.
  • Participate as required in the delivery of APG assessor training, pre-mutual evaluation training and FATF standards training.

Membership

The ME Working Group will comprise expert representatives from interested APG members and observer jurisdictions and observer organisations. Where possible, experienced and qualified assessors will be sought.

Members of the ME Working Group will have experience in undertaking mutual evaluations,reviewing mutual evaluation follow-up reports and/or have undertaken assessor training using the 2013 Assessment Methodology.

Membership of the ME Working Group may be on a fixed term or ad hoc basis, as required.

Members will be nominated at APG Annual Meetings or directly to the APG Secretariat and ME Working Group Co-chairs as necessary between meetings.

Chairing the Working Group

The ME Working Group Co-Chairs are Australia and Macao, China.