Human Security Collective: Multi-stakeholder Dialogue as a Means for Practical and Systemic Solutions for De-risking

December 9th, 2022

15:00 – 17:00

Commissarissenzaal - Riviervismarkt 5 the Hague

 

Anne-Floor Dekker, Programmamanager Gender, Vrede en Veiligheid bij WO=MEN | Dutch Gender PLatform, zal een van de sprekers zijn.

Programme:

14:45 – 15.00 Door open

15:00 – 15:10 Introduction and video

15:10 – 16:00 Practical Solutions: Looking at the Portal and Supervisory Models

16:00 – 16:45 Systemic Solutions: A Human Rights Approach to Tackling De-risking

16:45 – 17:00 Questions and Closing

The search for practical solutions has always been a crucial goal of the RTs. As the issue of de-risking is such an intrenched and international issue, the work of many NPO’s can simply not wait for the systemic solutions they so desperately need. Among the solutions that have been put forward to curb some of the most easily avoided iterations of de-risking are the NPO Banking Portal. ABN AMRO bank has developed the NPO Portal in collaboration with the RABO Bank, CBF and NPOs, with the aim to provide their NPO customers with better information about what they can do in order to be better prepared for the questions by the bank and which can enhance their understanding of the considerations that the bank has to make.

Another avenue explored is that of supervisory models to achieve good governance, which includes governance to deal with the potential risk for terrorism financing and money laundering. In the Netherlands we have been promoting the dual model, on the one hand the independent CBF Erkenning/seal of approval, membership and umbrella organizations’ codes of conduct and the other supervision by the tax authority for foundations that have an ANBI status.

Is this sufficient to provide comfort to banks? Would all foundations and associations fall in the low risk for terrorism financing/money laundering abuse category if they have a CBF Erkenning and/or an ANBI status ? Are banks and payment service providers open to acknowledge code of conducts developed by NPOs or letter of comforts by reputable donors such as ministries as risk mitigators? When is the bank satisfied with customer information? Is the information highlighted in the NPO portal exhaustive? We will discuss these questions and many more.

Speakers TBA

What would a true Human Rights Approach to Tackling De-risking look like? Experts have been arguing that when looking at their obligations under the Principles on Business and Human Rights, banks have a duty to consider de-risking along with the other human rights implications of their work. Withholding financial services from NPO’s does have real-world human rights impacts and these should be taken seriously by the bank. What would it look like if this was also codified in national policy? In the Netherlands we have already seen two court cases in which the court has ruled that considering that without a payment account it is practically impossible to participate in society, banks also provide an essential social service. The way the judges saw it, in these cases the interest of the foundation in the continuation of that relationship was greater than the interest of the bank in the termination of the banking relationship, and it was the duty of the bank to mitigate any risks instead of de-risking. In Belgium, for example, individuals have a right to a bank account. What would it look like if this was extended to NPO’s?

 

Speakers TBA