Terror Financing Through Informal Banking Networks In Afghanistan
I. Introduction
Afghanistan has been a focal point for terrorist activities for decades, with numerous groups relying on informal banking networks, such as hawala systems, to transfer funds covertly across borders. These systems, while essential for legitimate trade and remittances in Afghanistan’s largely cash-based economy, have been exploited for terror financing.
II. Legal Framework
1. Afghan Penal Code (2017)
Article 150-152: Criminalizes financing of terrorism, including knowingly providing funds or services to terrorist groups.
Article 153: Addresses the use of informal financial channels for illegal purposes.
Article 154: Establishes penalties for money laundering and terror financing.
2. Counter Terrorism Law (2016)
Defines terror financing broadly to include the provision or collection of funds with the intent or knowledge that they will be used for terrorism.
Mandates surveillance and regulation of financial transactions, including informal networks.
3. Anti-Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financing Regulations
Issued by the Afghanistan Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Center (FinTRACA).
Require hawala operators to register, report suspicious transactions, and maintain records.
4. International Commitments
Afghanistan is a member of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Asia Pacific Group.
Obligated to comply with global standards on combating terror financing.
III. Characteristics of Informal Banking Networks in Afghanistan
Hawala System: A trust-based, informal value transfer system without physical movement of money.
Widespread use: Due to limited banking infrastructure.
Challenges: Lack of documentation, anonymity, and ease of cross-border transfers make it vulnerable to abuse.
Dual-use: Used both for legitimate remittances and illicit financing.
IV. Legal Elements of Terror Financing through Informal Networks
Knowing provision of funds or financial services to terrorist organizations.
Use of hawala and informal money transfers to disguise origin and destination of funds.
Failure to report suspicious transactions by hawaladars.
Links to terrorist acts or groups, including Taliban, ISIS-K, and Al-Qaeda affiliates.
V. Case Law and Key Examples
Below are five important cases/incidents illustrating terror financing via informal banking and the Afghan legal system’s response.
1. The Case of Mawlawi Fazlullah’s Funding through Hawala (2013)
Background: Investigations revealed that the banned group led by Mawlawi Fazlullah used hawala networks to transfer funds from Pakistan into Afghanistan.
Legal Action: Afghan authorities froze accounts and arrested several hawaladars suspected of facilitating transfers.
Outcome: Several operators prosecuted under Penal Code Articles 150-152.
Significance: Demonstrated government’s increasing focus on disrupting terror financing networks.
2. Arrest of Hawala Operator in Kabul for Financing ISIS-K (2017)
Incident: A hawala operator was caught transferring funds to ISIS-K operatives in Nangarhar.
Evidence: Phone records, testimonies linked the operator to multiple suspicious transactions.
Legal Proceedings: Prosecuted under the Counter Terrorism Law; sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.
Significance: First high-profile conviction directly linking informal money transfer to terror financing.
3. Disruption of Taliban Funding Network via Hawala in Helmand (2018)
Operation: Afghan intelligence coordinated raids on hawala offices suspected of transferring funds to Taliban commanders.
Findings: Large cash flows with no documentation; operators failed to comply with FinTRACA regulations.
Legal Outcome: Operators faced charges; some fled; crackdown prompted stricter enforcement of registration.
Significance: Highlighted weaknesses in informal network regulation and steps toward strengthening oversight.
4. Case of Illegal Cross-Border Money Transfer Linked to Al-Qaeda (2019)
Background: Afghan police intercepted a courier carrying cash destined for Al-Qaeda cells in eastern provinces.
Investigation: Traced funds to hawala operators in Kabul who facilitated transfers without reporting.
Legal Proceedings: Operators charged with money laundering and terror financing under Penal Code Articles 153-154.
Significance: Showed multi-layered financing schemes using informal networks to support terrorist activities.
5. The AIHRC Report on Hawala and Terror Financing (2020)
Report Summary: Documented widespread abuse of informal banking for terror financing.
Case Examples: Cited cases where hawala operators knowingly or negligently facilitated funds to terrorist groups.
Recommendations: Urged stronger regulations, improved monitoring, and international cooperation.
Government Response: Ministry of Finance enhanced FinTRACA’s powers; launched awareness campaigns.
Significance: Illustrates institutional recognition of the problem and policy responses.
VI. Challenges in Addressing Terror Financing via Informal Networks
Cultural acceptance of hawala as essential financial infrastructure.
Lack of comprehensive regulation and enforcement capacity.
Corruption and complicity among some operators.
Cross-border jurisdictional issues complicate investigations.
Conflict and instability hamper state control and oversight.
VII. Conclusion
Terror financing through informal banking networks remains a serious challenge for Afghanistan’s security and governance. While Afghan law criminalizes such financing and has mechanisms for oversight, enforcement is complicated by socio-economic realities and security concerns.
Effective counter-terror financing requires:
Strengthening legal frameworks and regulatory institutions like FinTRACA.
Training and capacity building for law enforcement and judiciary.
Community engagement to reduce hawala abuse.
Regional and international cooperation for cross-border enforcement.
RELATED Blog
0 comments