洗錢防制之立法宗旨及國際規範本土化過程

The Legislative Tenor of Anti-Money Laundering and the Localization of International Regulations

在反洗錢規範全球化的浪潮下，臺灣雖曾為亞洲領先立專法管制的國家，但卻因忽視國際發展而迅速落後。迫於國際評鑑壓力，洗錢防制法在2016年末進行了全盤修正，並已於2017年中施行。本文嘗試深入考察本次修法的立法紀錄，並就修法的時空背景與國際「防制洗錢金融行動工作小組」（FATF）公布之「四十項建議」相互參照，以探求新法的立法方向，以及法規範的本土化過程。研究發現，本次修法直接引進了國際規範的內容，雖使我國暫時脫離「亞太洗錢防制組織」（APG）評鑑的過渡追蹤名單，卻也造成新法條文在國內適用上的問題，形同一種以國際法令遵循為基礎的修法。此外國家層級的風險評估始終未完成，並未真正依循最新國際規範所要求「以風險為基礎」的防制走向。面對APG下階段相互評鑑將納入執行成果為考察對象，這樣的修法成果恐仍力有未逮。

Taiwan ignores the international development of anti-money laundering and falls be-hind the wave of globalization of the regime quickly, though we once were the leading country on the legislation of Money Laundering Control Act among Asia. Under pressure of the international mutual evaluation, Money Laundering Control Act had been amended at the end of 2016 and has been in effect since middle 2017. This ar-ticle tries to clarify the approach to this new Amendment and its course of localization by studying the legislative records and referring to the background as well as the Fi-nancial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) “40 Recommendations”. This study finds that the Amendment employed some rules of international regulations plainly, which had helped us to be free from the Transitional Follow-Up under Asia/Pacific Group on Money Laundering (APG) mutual evaluation. Nonetheless, the Amendment takes an approach identical to international compliance and raises new issues regarding domestic enforcing. Meanwhile, the Amendment does not really comply with the “risk-based” approach advised in the latest international regulations due to the noncompletion of risk evolution at national level. When APG is going to include effects of control as targets, this Amendment may be far from enough to face the following mutual evaluation in the next stage.