Facts
On November 22, 1999, the Federal Office of Police transmitted to the Geneva investigating judge a letter of request issued by a prosecutor in London for the purposes of an investigation opened against B., his spouse C., and D., primarily suspected of money laundering, in particular through the companies E. and F.
On July 17, 2000, the investigating judge entered into the matter. By a closing order dated April 10, 2002, he decided to transmit to the requesting authority the documents relating to a bank account held by company A., into which 28,000 US$ had been received, originating from E. and F.
By order of August 29, 2002, the Geneva Indictment Chamber confirmed this decision. The suspicions of money laundering were sufficiently exposed and allowed for a corresponding charge to be upheld under Swiss law.
A. filed an administrative law appeal against this order, which the Federal Tribunal rejected.
Considerations
According to the Federal Tribunal, the request for assistance does not necessarily have to mention what the predicate offence consists of, but can simply state suspicious transactions. The requesting authority does not have to indicate what the predicate offence consists of, as this corresponds to the notion of "the widest possible" mutual assistance envisaged not only in Art. 1 of the European Convention on Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters (ECMACM), but also in Arts. 7(1) and 8 of the Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds of Crime (CLSSC).
The scale of the…