Contact
Get In Touch
Author
Abdul Azeem
LLB (Hons) LLM
Deploying Enhanced Due Diligence for Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs)
In the global effort to combat corruption, bribery, and illicit finance, the Politically Exposed Person (PEP) category represents one of the most critical and complex risk segments. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) defines a PEP as an individual who is, or has been, entrusted with a prominent public function. This classification is preventive, not punitive, yet their influential position creates an inherent vulnerability to the misuse of public funds and abuse of power.
Why PEPs are Categorised as High Risk
The UAE’s robust AML compliance framework, driven by the guidance of the Central Bank (CBUAE) and the Ministry of Economy (MoE) for DNFBPs, mandates rigorous, documented Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD) for any client identified as a PEP, their family member, or their close associate. Failure to correctly screen, identify, and manage this risk is a direct breach of regulatory requirements.
Why PEPs are Categorised as High Risk?
Global bodies, from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) to the Wolfsberg Group and the Egmont Group, uniformly view PEPs as high-risk for specific, structural reasons:
Access to State Assets: PEPs and their associates often control or have privileged access to state assets, contracts, and regulatory decisions, creating high potential for corruption and bribery.
Concealment Methods: They frequently employ complex, multi-layered corporate structures, often involving shell companies, to obscure their Ultimate Beneficial Ownership (UBO) and the true Source of Funds (SoF).
Global Standard: FATF Recommendation 12 establishes the international benchmark, requiring reporting entities to apply EDD, regardless of the PEP’s origin (Foreign, Domestic, or International Organisation PEP).
- Foreign PEPs (individuals entrusted with prominent public functions by a foreign country),
- Domestic PEPs (individuals entrusted with prominent public functions within the UAE), and
- International Organisation PEPs (those entrusted with a prominent function by an international body, such as senior management).
The UAE Regulatory Mandate: CBUAE & MoE Requirements
In the UAE, the PEP protocol is tightly prescribed, differentiating between Foreign and Domestic PEPs:
| Mandatory Requirement (Federal Decree-Law) | Strategic Implementation by the MLRO |
| Risk Management System | During onboarding or otherwise, Implementing automated, proprietary screening solutions to detect matches against global PEP watchlists and cross-referencing with Adverse Media and Sanctions Screening. |
| Senior Management Approval | Obtaining written approval from Senior Management (or the Board) before establishing or continuing a business relationship with an identified PEP or a high-risk Domestic PEP. |
| Source of Funds/Wealth | Taking reasonable measures to establish the Source of Funds (SoF) and Source of Wealth (SoW), a critical EDD step requiring objective, verifiable documentation (e.g., public asset declarations, audited financials). |
| Continuous Monitoring | Applying Ongoing Monitoring with increased frequency and intensity to transactions and behaviours to detect any suspicious activity or profile deviations. |
The PEP Screening Protocol: A Three-Point System
Our approach ensures the PEP screening process is auditable and defensible:
Identification: Screening the customer and all related individuals (UBOs, Directors, family members, and close associates) during the initial KYC process.
Classification: Differentiating the PEP type (Foreign, Domestic, or International) and assessing the inherent risk based on the country’s corruption index and the seniority of the position held.
Documentation: Creating a dedicated PEP Risk Profile which outlines the EDD steps taken, the verified SoW/SoF, and the explicit senior management approval, ensuring full readiness for regulatory inspection.
Securing the Integrity of Your Client Base
Robust onboarding is the most cost-effective anti-crime measure a business can implement. It minimises the future costs associated with regulatory fines, reputational damage, and the disruptive process of Derisking unwanted clients.