Transparency International, along with a number of European Parliament members, has strongly criticized the decision to strike the United Arab Emirates from an official list of nations deemed high-risk for money laundering and terrorist financing. The group argues this move weakens financial safeguards across the European Union.
A campaigner for the anti-corruption organization stated that, despite recent legal changes adopted by the Gulf state, it remains premature to assess their actual impact in curbing illicit finance. The official highlighted persistent enforcement failures, particularly within the property sector, where questionable transactions flagged by investigative journalists have not been pursued by authorities.
A major investigative report uncovered over one thousand properties in Dubai linked to more than two hundred individuals, including convicted criminals, fugitives, and sanctioned entities. This investigation illustrated how legal gaps continue to attract dirty money.
The watchdog also faulted the bloc’s process for compiling the list, claiming it lacks proper oversight. A more transparent system, it was argued, would allow individual review of countries rather than forcing a single vote on the entire updated roster.
Last week, the European legislature declined to reject the proposed change to the list of high-risk jurisdictions, allowing it to take effect. The updated roster removes the Gulf state along with several others, including a Caribbean island, a British Overseas Territory, and nations in Latin America, Africa, and the Caribbean. New additions include countries from Africa, Europe, and Asia. Removal from the list eases strict due diligence requirements for banks and financial institutions within the EU.
The decision has triggered a backlash, with some lawmakers labeling it a politically motivated concession. One Green Party representative stated that yielding to geopolitical pressure sends a dangerous message, noting that the Gulf nation continues to function as a financial hub for criminals from Europe, facilitates gold smuggling from conflict zones, and is central to a crypto-to-cash network exploited by certain wealthy individuals.
Critics also pointed to the persistent absence of a major Eastern European nation from the list, three years into a significant conflict, calling this omission difficult to justify.
In response to these concerns, the European Commission issued a last-minute pledge to review countries suspended from a global financial watchdog, including the nation in question, even if they are not officially designated as high-risk. This commitment is widely seen as a factor that swayed undecided lawmakers.
One German lawmaker noted that the Commission’s promise to reconsider listing the Eastern European nation by year’s end helped secure support. Another Christian Democrat member offered a more favorable view, acknowledging the Gulf state’s progress in updating its legal and institutional frameworks while agreeing that the Commission’s pledge was essential. He also welcomed plans to strengthen the process through a new EU anti-money laundering authority.
Despite opposition from Green and left-leaning groups, a majority of lawmakers voted to approve the revised list, falling short of the absolute majority needed to block it.
Civil society groups maintain that international pressure has triggered some reforms in the Gulf state, but argue these changes remain superficial, particularly given the lack of accountability for illicit flows into its financial hub and limited law enforcement cooperation.