Azerbaijan needs to clear itself of �dirty money� image

***

-Gubad bey, British investigators have frozen a banking account of Azerbaijan related to laundering dirty money amounting to several billion dollars. The National Crime Agency reported on December 12 that an order on freezing accounts is a first step related to "Azerbaijani money laundry". It turns out that these steps may last rather long. Is that likely and if "yes" in what form?

-This is a logical result of contituing processes, for Britain is prone to trigger a process not only due to the Azerbaijani case but the dirty money laundering problem as a whole. The topic was broached as far back as in 2015, during a global summit of the Open Government Partnership in London where the then British Prime Minister David Cameron called for decisive struggle against the corruption. To all appearance, the Prime Minister would hold his position, Brexit would fail and decisions of Britain tougher. The point was that the Prime Minister assumed the liability, specified a name of the program and its directions. One of the main directions was to identify property owners especially as there is a great quantity of immovables in London and suburbs whose owners remain unknown. London is reputed to be one of the dirty money laundering centers. It is natural that the British authorities are anxious about the current situation.An article titled "Azerbaijani money laundry" referred to specific documents, as well as London-registered companies-leaders in the process. After the world public became aware of this, London"s actions were predictable, so the related processes are expected to drag on long. How these processes will develop is dependent upon results of the investigation. All things considered, if Azerbaijan has really collaborated with other companies to launder the dirty money, the above-stated is revealed, for London will face no difficulties in doing it. In all probability, British law-enforcement bodes are engaged in exploring the new information.

- British mass media have repeatedly raised a topic of dirty money laundering. As from 2015, many authoritative media organs have dealt with turnover of dirty money in Britain, purchase of expensive real estate in London by citizens of former Soviet Republics. Later on, a topic on the agenda was immovables owned by Russian banker Muhtar Ablyazov, by Zamira Hajiyeva, a wife of the former head of the International Bank of Azerbaijan, Janghir Hajiyev. But it should be remembered that Britain has also gained money from dirty money turnover. Is it possible that Britain is full of determination in the matter? Or instead, the government of Britain having sacrificed two/three persons is merely demonstrating its intent to belie the topic?

-I don"t think that the latest London developments are none other than a campaign. It is natural that there is a certain ground to think so due to Zamira Hajiyeva"s property. In the meanwhile, Azerbaijan-related topics did exist, true, about larger property though no information on the subject had been spread. The point is about a remaining influence on political power in London, specifically about Azerbaijan-related companies, as well as companies lobbying interests of the country in the matter. This may be explained as being due to the information about property of Zamira Hajiyeva and Russian banker Muhtar Ablyazov. I don"t think that the point here is about a mere campaign, for activities on this track will be continued. Besides, Britain adopted a global act of Magnitskiy from the United States. From this standpoint Britain bears legal liabilities and political responsibility for the goings-on. If the facts are revealed, hence, Britain-related suspicions come true. Therefore I do not accept allegations that the British government having sacrificed one/two persons is willing to belie the topic. It is an integral part of global initiatives arising from transparency, accountability, money laundering, return of stolen money and disclosure of names of property owners. Countries like Great Britain will, willy-nilly, get involved in the process.

- It is alleged that the inquiry into "Azerbaijani laundry" within the framework of the Organized Criminality and Corruption Report Project (OCCRP) revealed that the Estonian branch of Danske Bank ruled accounts of four Britain-registered companies.

By means of these accounts the Azerbaijani elite transferred money, offered a bounties to European politicians. The issue was discussed by the PACE and the EU. These studies mentioned names of Elkhan Suleymanov and other persons having properties in London. Suffice it to mention cases of Zamira Hajiyeva, as well as freezing of banking accounts of persons involved in the investigation - will the British government impose sanctions on the persons mentioned above?

-I don"t think that any sanctions will be imposed on the persons cited above. I believe that the government of Britain won"t apply any sanctions in respect of Elkhan Suleymanov and persons involved in the process. It was the investigation mentioned above that Azerbaijan has increasingly been referred to by the international community due to the corruption and money laundering. A special commission was set up by the PACE to clarify a question of deputies" being recruited by Azerbaijani deputies. What are consequences for Azerbaijan if the processes continue? Will these processes influence relations between Azerbaijan and the West, as well as between Great Britain, PACE and the CE? Will, of course. It was expected that the last London decision was to be used as a source in the cource of debates in the PACE. Note that no debates on this issue are over so far. In other words, there is a commission to explore the matter, make some conclusions and submit a report of the commission to reflect decisions as adopted in Britain. As a whole, these questions will have a negative effect on the relations between Azerbaijan and the PACE, European Parliament. The point is that there is a need in making inquiries into whether laundered money had been spent for lobby activity in Europe, particularly in Brussels. New facts, new statement and decisions are expected following the end of the commission activity and a related report thereunder.

-How is Azerbaijan going to get out of the situation?

-It should be remembered that the situation around Azerbaijan is not very nice and the country is eager to get out of impasse. At least, companies lobbying Azerbaijan in Europe will be able to acquire means to protect interests of the country. From now on, Azerbaijan will have to collaborate with a great number of companies and more expensive projects to thus avoid undesirable consequences. However, not everything is dependent upon activities of companies lobbying Azerbaijan. That will depend upon a principled stand of other institutions on the issue, including the PACE and European Parliament. At any rate, the current situation in Azerbaijan will remain in the spotlight of international organizations. If Azerbaijan fails to take appropriate measures for the release of political prisoners, stand of these institutions will be tougher which will complicate the possibility of Azerbaijan"s way out of the situation.

-What is Azerbaijan going to do to clear its name? What will Azerbaijan do to wipe off all stains? Are there any preventive measures to take?

- To my thinking, Azerbaijan is at a dead end, The whole setup is getting damn bad by now. Suffice it to say that a name of Azerbaijan has already been referred to in university debates on corruption and money laundering. Most distressingly, the authority of Azerbaijan has seriously been blown upon by recent dishonorable activities of the country"s government. Testifying to this is a cleavage on Azerbaijan and Armenia in the course of a recent Forum of Eastern Partnership. The latest elections in Georgia and Armenia were held in terms of free competition; besides, it was the peace revolution in Armenia that made it possible to improve the flyblown reputation of this country.

Granting this, Azerbaijan should make the most of the situation and hold free democratic elections in the country, ensure democracy and human rights, release political prisoners. Actions of this sort are likely to enhance the authority of the country. An end should put to political repressions and conditions created for activities of independent civil society. Should this happen, positive changes are sure to take place in the image of Azerbaijan?

- Can these actions of Britain be regarded as a political pressure on the authorities of Azerbaijan?

- There is no need for Britain to place pressures on Azerbaijan. Close relations and collaroration are maintained between the two countries, especially economy, trade, ivestments, etc. The same is true of political and diplomatic relations. From this standpoint I do not evaluate British steps as a political pressure on the Azerbaijani authorities. In my view, this is an integral part of British policy, so the Azerbaijani athorities are not concerned about recent developments. In other words, the British-Azerbaijani cooperation is in progress. Azerbaijan posed no problems for British companies which are active in Azerbaijan in the most favorable legal, tax, customs and currency conditions. The parties will face no problems in investment and trade relations. From that angle, all the above cannot be regarded a political pressure on the Azerbaijani authorities.