Due Process In Financial Surveillance: A Comparative Constitutional Study Of ECIR In India And SAR Regimes In The UK And United States
- IJLLR Journal
- Mar 19
- 1 min read
Krishna Panditrao Shelke, National Law University, Delhi
ABSTRACT
This paper offers a critical comparison of India’s Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) system under the Prevention of Money- Laundering Act 2002 and the Suspicious Activity Reporting (SAR) frameworks in the United Kingdom and the United States. It attempts to explain how each system works with respect to the anti-money laundering framework and how the protection of people's rights is balanced with the enforcement of laws against money laundering. The ECIR process in India gives the executive branch a lot of power which makes it easier to follow the law but also makes it more likely that due process and transparency rules will be broken raising questions about the existence of separation of powers in India. The SAR system in the UK on the other hand, is based strictly on the law. It requires strict reporting but it makes sure that courts quickly review enforcement actions and that human rights are respected. The U.S. approach gives banks and federal agencies broad surveillance powers but these are checked by judicial safeguards post facto. Courts have generally supported this system because of strong state interests though there are ongoing debates about privacy and executive power. This paper compares the legal authority, judicial oversight, protection of fundamental rights and adherence to the rule of law in each country. It draws attention to the ways that the constitutional values of each country influence its anti-money laundering framework leading to a variety of models that are each successful in their own unique ways but entail trade-offs.
Keywords: ECIR, SAR, PMLA, ED, POCA.
