Viewing cable 05VILNIUS1049
Title: TERRORIST FINANCING: LITHUANIA ACCEPTS EU COURT

IdentifierCreatedReleasedClassificationOrigin
05VILNIUS10492005-10-03 14:45:00 2011-08-30 01:44:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Vilnius
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS VILNIUS 001049 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPT FOR EUR/NB, IO, EB/ESC/TFS, S/CT, IO/PSC 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: EFIN KTFN KPAO PREL PGOV PTER LH
SUBJECT: TERRORIST FINANCING: LITHUANIA ACCEPTS EU COURT 
DECISION 
 
REF: SECSTATE 172518 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: The Acting Head of the MFA's Threat 
Analysis Division told us on September 28 that Lithuania 
continues to support dialogue to ensure effective sanctions 
against terrorist financing.  Stonys said that the GOL is 
pleased that the European Court of First Instance (ECI) 
decided the case of "Somali Swede 3" in the EU's favor.  The 
GOL had no serious complaints about the UNSCR 1267 or 1373 
processes and will likely not press for changes to either. 
We emphasized the importance of timely national action in 
implementing Lithuania's obligations under 1267 and 1373 and 
welcomed further cooperation with the GOL in the war on 
terror.  END SUMMARY. 
 
----------------------------- 
GOL PLEASED WITH ECI DECISION 
----------------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) Gintaras Stonys, Acting Head of the MFA,s Threat 
Analysis, Crisis Management, and International Operations 
Division, told us on September 28 that the GOL supports 
continued open dialogue to ensure that sanctions against 
terrorist financing are effective.  Stonys said that the GOL 
is pleased that the European Court of First Instance (ECI) on 
21 September decided the case of Ahmed Yusuf Ali Al-Qadi 
("Somali Swede 3") in the EU,s favor.  He said that this 
decision confirmed that the EU,s procedures under UN 
Security Council Resolution 1267 are legal and that they do 
not violate human rights. 
 
¶3. (SBU) Stonys said that the GOL had no serious complaints 
about either the UNSCR 1267 or 1373 processes.  He noted that 
the 1373 obligations are more cumbersome than 1267 and more 
open to legal challenges in the EU because of the requirement 
that the EU compile its own list of individuals and entities. 
 He doubted, however, that the GOL will press for changes to 
either.  Stonys told us that a discussion of both the 1267 
and 1373 processes is on the EU's RELEX Sanction Committee's 
agenda for September 27, but he has not yet received a 
readout from the meeting. 
 
¶4. (SBU) We emphasized to Stonys the importance of timely 
national action on implementing asset freezes, travel bans, 
and arms embargoes in accordance with Lithuania's obligations 
as a UN member state under resolutions 1267 and 1373.  He 
admitted that an unfortunate time gap occurs between an 
entity's listing on the 1267 list and EU enforcement action. 
 
¶5. (SBU) We told Stonys that we welcomed dialogue with the 
GOL that would make UN sanctions more effective and 
emphasized our commitment in continuing our cooperation with 
the GOL in the war on terrorism.  We also informed him of the 
London U.S.-EU expert-level workshop on issues related to 
FATF Special Recommendation III (SR III). 
 
------- 
COMMENT 
------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) The GOL, as a supportive partner in the war on 
terror, will entertain USG suggestions for improvements in 
how we fight this war together.  It is, however, likely to 
let other (larger) EU member states take the lead role in 
shaping any changes to EU sanctions enforcement mechanisms. 
MULL