The Commission’s proposal for a directive amending the fourth AML directive raises numerous issues concerning respect of the rights to privacy and to protection of personal data. The main challenges are related to the creation of central and public registries of beneficial ownership information and to the extension of the powers of the financial intelligence units concerning access to financial data. The latter is of utmost concern, as this new power of access to personal data is not balanced with explicit legal guarantees. Financial data, however, are private data deserving adequate protection.

The article analyses the EU’s anti-money laundering (AML) framework under Directive 2015/849 (the fourth AML Directive) and the Commission’s July 2016 proposal for amendments. Met-Domestici explains how the reforms respond to terrorist financing risks and evolving laundering methods by broadening the scope of obliged entities (including virtual currency exchanges and gambling providers), adding tax crimes as predicate offences, tightening rules on prepaid cards, and focusing on politically exposed persons and high-risk third countries. The proposal also strengthens customer due diligence, beneficial ownership transparency, central registers, and cooperation between Financial Intelligence Units. While these measures mark significant progress, the author argues that long-term effectiveness requires further integration, including the possible establishment of a European FIU and extending the EPPO’s jurisdiction to money laundering and terrorism.

The article critiques recent EU AML moves—4AMLD and the Commission’s 2016 package—through five lenses: scope, ECDD, beneficial ownership, FIUs, and criminalisation. It welcomes extending coverage to gambling and lowering the cash threshold, but flags gaps (e.g., construction/property developers; ambiguity on letting agents) and says virtual-asset gatekeepers belong inside the regime (as the 2016 proposal suggests). The Commission’s mandatory enhanced CDD list for high-risk third-country dealings may curb forum-shopping but risks cost, de-risking, and lost intelligence; a smarter calibration of the risk-based approach is urged. Beneficial ownership registers are innovative yet fragile without verification and clear sanctions, and wider/public access raises unresolved data-protection questions. Expanding FIU powers (direct access to obliged-entity data; bank-account registries) could speed analysis but needs tighter legal limits to avoid incoherence and privacy problems. On criminalisation, the piece cautions against over-broad predicate catalogues and negligence-based offences; it argues for careful treatment of self-laundering and prioritising robust enforcement … Read more

The article reflects on the legacy of the 1941 Ventotene Manifesto in light of today’s European Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). While Spinelli and his co-authors could not foresee cross-border judicial cooperation or harmonised procedural rights, their call for federalism and equality foreshadowed the Charter of Rights and the AFSJ. Salazar argues that placing the individual at the centre of Europe remains the key to reviving the “spirit of Ventotene.” He highlights current shortcomings – from limited powers for Eurojust to stalled progress on the EPPO – as examples of the cost of “non-Europe,” and calls for a renewed commitment to integration, rights protection, and effective justice across the Union.