This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS PARIS 003292 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FOR EB/ESC/TFS (LLAMBERT), EUR/ERA AND EUR/WE 
TREASURY FOR TFFC, OFAC 
JUSTICE FOR CRM/ARFMLS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETTC PTER EFIN KTFN FR PGOV EUN
SUBJECT: TERRORISM FINANCE: FRENCH AUTHORITY TO FREEZE 
ASSETS 
 
REF: A. 04 STATE 193684 
     ¶B. STATE 28352 
     ¶C. STATE 32688 
     ¶D. STATE 32549 
     ¶E. PARIS 7561 
 
¶1. (SBU) Per reftels, Post includes below points on French 
asset-freezing authority for terrorist finance issues. 
 
¶2. (SBU) France's legal authority to freeze assets is based 
on the state's traditional power to use capital controls 
where necessary.  Therefore, the main authority is based on 
French administrative law, which is sufficient for the GOF to 
exert full asset-freezing authority.  Discussions on the 
enacting of specific asset-freezing legislation have 
continued but have not resulted in any concrete proposals. 
Investigating judges (a judge that combines both 
prosecutorial and judicial authority) can also order the 
seizure or freeze of assets of individuals under 
investigation.  Three investigating judges specialize in 
investigating financial crimes and recently have collaborated 
with terrorism investigating judges on terrorism finance 
cases. 
 
¶3. (SBU) France's Ministry of Finance implements sanctions 
against individuals and organizations, while approval to 
designate comes from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (in 
collaboration with French intelligence agencies).  The 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs authorizes and transmits national 
positions regarding individuals and entities proposed for 
listing by the EU Clearing House mechanism. 
 
¶4. (SBU) France has national authority to freeze terrorist 
assets, and this authority is fully autonomous.  Once the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs has given its approval to 
designate, the Ministry of Finance implements the decision. 
In general, France does not designate lightly.  It will not 
designate solely based on outside pressure, and insists on 
making an independent decision.  It does not hesitate to buck 
consensus in the Clearing House if necessary and furthermore, 
it is especially touchy regarding the confidentiality of 
Clearing House discussions. 
 
¶5. (SBU) No structural impediments currently exist for more 
robust cooperation on co-sponsoring designations.  In 
general, French officials are eager to co-sponsor in 
situations where they agree on the merit of the designation, 
believing that cooperation at the UN is a key strength of the 
US-French counter-terrorism relationship.  Most differences 
of opinion can be managed by comparing information on 
potential designees.  The most important exception to this 
daily cooperation is French intransigence on designating 
Hezbollah.  Although France claims it has not received 
definitive evidence of Hezbollah involvement in terrorism, 
designation in this case is a political decision with 
President Chirac believed to be the final arbiter. 
 
¶6. (SBU) France would likely reject USG offers of training 
and technical assistance in the belief that they possess the 
same level of technical competence as their USG counterparts. 
 They would likely welcome expert-level and political-level 
exchanges/discussions on terrorism finance issues. 
 
¶7. (SBU) Given France's significant immigrant population, it 
is potentially a "high" risk as a site for significant fund 
raising for terrorists.  The GOF recognizes this threat and 
has recently redoubled its efforts to focus on terrorist 
financing issues.  On April 18-19, French police arrested 
twelve people in the Parisian area on suspicion of financing 
terrorist/Islamist causes.  Three of those arrested continue 
to be held in detention, and one of them has been formally 
placed under investigation on terrorism finance charges.  The 
mid-April sweep was the first in a joint investigation begun 
February 25 by terrorism investigating judge Jean-Louis 
Bruguiere and financial crime investigating judge Philippe 
Courroye.  Ref E details how the GOF investigates terrorist 
finance from an administrative (as opposed to judicial) 
perspective. 
WOLFF