While reading one of the posts on identifying the hawaladar (ref ) I came across a case involving Dr. Mahmoud Banki. This case was interesting because from the beginning in May 2006 until 2009, Banki’s family began to transfer large amounts of money—totaling some $3.4 million—from Iran to the United States. The defense argued these transfers were necessary to protect the family’s assets. In addition to that Banki’s mother testified that the money was intended to be used to purchase an apartment in the United States for herself, Banki, and his brother. All this money was transferred using the Hawala channel and hence the transactions appeared to be suspicious.
Below is a relevant extract from the case:
Between May 2006 and September 2009, Banki received as many as 56 hawala-related deposits in his Bank of America account from at least 44 different individuals and companies. Most of the deposits were made via wire transfer, but some were made via ATM deposit, counter credit, or check. Wires for the transfers included references to one contract for pistachios and to another for “tomato paste and transportation.” The denominations of the individual deposits ranged from $2,600 to $199,971. There were nine deposits of $10,000 or less; forty-one deposits of between $10,000 and $100,000; and six deposits of more than $100,000. In total, almost $3.4 million was deposited into
Banki’s account. Banki retained this $3.4 million for his personal use, including the purchase of a $2.4 million apartment in New York City.
The hawala system is widely used in Middle Eastern and South Asian countries, and is primarily used to make international funds transfers.1Though there are many forms of hawala, in the paradigmatic hawala system, funds are transferred from one country to another through a network of hawala brokers (i.e., “hawaladars”), with one hawaladar located in the transferor’s country and one in the transferee’s country. In this form, a hawala works as follows: If Person A in Country A wants to send $1,000 to Person B in Country B, Person A contacts Hawaladar A in Country A and pays him $1,000. Hawaladar A then contacts Hawaladar B in Country B and asks Hawaladar B to pay $1,000 in Country B currency, minus any fees, to Person B. The effect of this transaction is that Person A has remitted $1,000 (minus any fees) to Person B, although no money has actually crossed the border between Country A and Country B…
Detailed case report link: here
Google search link: here
Ref link : here