In an age where financial transparency is increasingly being utilized as a tool to root out corruption and money laundering, and as the lines between banking and government become more opaque, some criminals are resorting to another means to move their illicit funds: attorneys. Bankers in the U.S. are required both to know their customers and report suspicious activities, but what about lawyers? Should they be?
Some feel that, apart from the mandatory currency transaction reporting required of all businesses, forcing attorneys to also report the “suspicious” financial activities of their clients is an affront to everything the attorney-client privilege represents. For how can one be confident revealing their side of the story to their attorney if there is a fear of reprisal on his/her behalf? By the same token, one may wonder how we as a society can embrace a legal system comprised of paid oral advocates who, given the environment in which they operate, may be incentivized to turn a blind eye to the suspicious nature of the funds they received...
How do you side on this issue?
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed herein are solely in a private capacity and do not, in any way, represent the views of any entity of the U.S. Government, Read our full Disclaimer for more information.
Counterpoint™ is a shared on-line journal covering current news and opinion analysis; specifically, developments relating to law¹ , philosophy, politics, and other social sciences.
Listen to the Counterpoint™ Podcast
¹ Materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. Contact a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction for advice on a specific legal issue. Read our full Disclaimer for more information.