Challenge

The Maidan Square disaster on the eve of the Ukrainian Revolution and the following fall of Yanukovych’s government, triggered the Russian annexation of Crimea and a souring of the relationship between Russia and the West.

On March 5, 2014 the EU Council froze the assets of 18 former Ukrainian high-ranking officials, suspected of involvement in the Maidan Square disaster and misappropriation of state property. Among them Mykola Azarov, the former Prime Minister of Ukraine, and his son Oleksii Azarov, turned to Alber & Geiger for help.

Strategy

The strategy employed was built on an awareness of the full scope of the rule of law in Europe today, looking at the procedural fairness surrounding the sanctions. It required a subtle deployment of innovative legal arguments and emotional intelligence to navigate through the political turbulence, EU officials and peripheral actors to the institutions, for Alber & Geiger to demonstrate their innocence with strong convictions about their executive culpability.

We put forward that the freezing of funds was of a persecutive nature and not within EU competence. The three pronged approach attacked the premise of the sanctions at the right places and times. Alber & Geiger challenged the (1) legality, (2) legitimacy and (3) non-arbitrariness of the action, grasping all the potential playmakers.

Results

Ultimately the we were able to successfully get the freezing orders imposed on Oleksii Azarov removed, and considerably improve the position of Mykola Azarov. We made clear that the arbitrary targeting of individuals lacked a sufficient legal premise.

Through diligent fact finding we were able to cast doubt on the premise of the government’s alleged responsibility in the first place. We ultimately managed to help reinforce the rule of law, getting platform for the notions of fairness and equitable treatment of individuals into the public forum at a time when fairness was not an institutional priority.

Challenge

Alber & Geiger represented Panama in the aftermath of the “Panama papers” with regard to the new EU anti money laundering blacklist. As a result of the “Panama papers” the EU decided for the first time to set up its own blacklist. Before that, the EU would copy the international Financial Action Task Force (FATF) lists.

In Summer 2019, Panama was added to the grey list of FATF, at a time when the country was finalizing its reforms. Alber & Geiger was called to halt the result in FATF from spilling over in the EU and to weigh in the new EU methodology and the procedural gaps in the EU listing. Panama was caught in a timing paradox: Its automatic EU listing would be followed by a potential delisting from FATF, without clear assurances that the latter would be reflected in an EU delisting.

Strategy

Our goal was straightforward: raise awareness for Panama’s advances in combating money laundering and through that ensure that the EU will not unjustly list Panama as a high risk third country. Our message had to circle in the three key EU institutions. The architect of the procedure and list of high risk third countries, the European Commission, and the gatekeepers of the procedure, the European Parliament and the Member States.

Our message was tailor made for each front, appealing the several working levels and directorates of the Commission, the Committees of the European Parliament and different levels of organization in the Member States. Alber & Geiger grasped the opportunity of the drafting of the new methodology for the EU listing of high risk third countries, to engage with the different Commission directorates involved in the process and apply Panama’s position. In the Parliament, we focused on rewarding a third country such as Panama, which is determined to turn a bad precedent into a success story and we stressed upon the bilateral relationships of Panama towards the Member States.

Results

The EU did not implement its list and methodology as planned. Panama being listed by the EU as a high risk third country within the EU anti money laundering framework now is based on an automatic listing/delisting process with FATF. Our lobbying efforts enhanced the visibility and acknowledgement of Panama’s efforts in modernizing its anti-money laundering regime and changed the original EU methodology draft according to the demands of Panama.

Challenge

The EU imposed onerous penalties on our client, the Republic of Bulgaria. €825 million of pre-accession funds were frozen. It was a response to its alleged failure to combat corruption, organized crime and misuse of EU funds. Funds worth up to €7 billion over the next six years were also at risk. The Bulgarian government turned to Alber & Geiger for help.

Strategy

Alber & Geiger’s multi-faceted approach involved sophisticated legal analysis calibrated through a dynamic, institution sensitive communications strategy. It incorporated practical considerations like staff changes in the Bulgarian government as well as larger semantic and structural reasons for misunderstandings.

Results

Alber & Geiger was able to restore trust and confidence between the European Commission and the Bulgarian government. The result was the unfreezing of the €500 million in EU funds and the de-jeopardizing of the rest of the €7 billion.