International Bar Leaders Senate - Budapest

Can the protection of confidential client information and the disclosure of information to combat money laundering be reconciled, or are they in fact diametrically opposed?

This is a decision that governments, courts and lawyers are increasingly having to face.

Some would argue that the attorney-client privilege is a basic value in any democratic society-- a fundamental principle of justice that must be accorded the highest priority.

That is the position that was taken by the Supreme Court of Canada in February 2015.

Others, citing events that have been occurring with increasing frequency in recent months, contend that priority must be placed on putting a stop to money laundering-- a recognised source of terrorist financing-- and eliminating barriers to unrestricted access to all sources of information.

Isn’t this one of the consequences of the adoption of the 4^th AML Directive by the European Parliament in May 2015?

What position should bar associations and law societies take on this issue?

We encourage all of you to attend the meeting of the International Bar Leaders’ Senate, listen to the speakers address the different aspects of this situation, and take an active part in developing the solutions that will hopefully emerge out of this broad exchange of views. Working as we do in an environment that is increasingly open to alternative solutions and negotiated arrangements, is it possible to develop solutions that reconcile these two situations? The Yin and the Yang?