100 billion Swiss francs, 37,000 people or companies, 18,000 bank accounts… These dizzying figures are the result of an investigation carried out by a consortium of 48 media, the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP ), which includes The world, The Guardian, the Miami Herald, the Nation.
The latter published, on Sunday evening, the conclusions of this investigation into Credit Suisse, which for several decades hosted tens of billions of euros in funds of criminal or illicit origin. The financial establishment “firmly rejects” these accusations, made after the study of data submitted anonymously a little over a year ago to the German daily Suddeutsche Zeitung.
- What does the investigation accuse the Swiss bank of?
Credit Suisse is accused of having hosted funds of criminal or illicit origin for years. In total, more than 100 billion Swiss francs (more than 95 billion euros) are involved in the accounts studied by the consortium.
“Based on a massive leak of information from thousands of bank accounts administered by Credit Suisse, (the investigation) shows that in defiance of the rules of vigilance imposed on large international banks, the establishment, born in Zurich, harbored funds linked to crime and corruption for several decades,” writes The world. A practice made possible by Swiss banking secrecy.
- Who is affected by this data?
These data relate to more than 18,000 bank accounts hosted at Credit Suisse between the beginning of the 1940s and the end of the 2010s and belonging to 37,000 people or companies, the daily specifies. The leaks are mainly focused on developing countries: in Africa, the Middle East, Asia and South America and customers domiciled in Western Europe represent only 1% of the total, the newspaper specifies.
According to The world, it is the money “of dozens of dictators and corrupt politicians, large fortunes of illicit or dubious origin, individuals and companies hit by international sanctions, even criminal networks or mafia”. The daily then cites a few names of personalities, such as King Abdallah II of Jordan, but also politicians and senior officials from Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen, at the time of the “Arab Springs”. .
- How is Credit Suisse defending itself?
In a statement, Credit Suisse reacted to these accusations, saying that the data studied are “partial, inaccurate, or are taken out of context, resulting in a biased presentation of the conduct of business” by the bank. “90% of the accounts concerned are now closed, including more than 60% before 2015”, assures the bank, which also specifies “to conduct the investigation” concerning the data leak.
“These media allegations appear to be a concerted effort to discredit the Swiss financial center, which has undergone fundamental changes since the global financial crisis, while specifically targeting Credit Suisse with a barrage of unsubstantiated allegations.” establishment.
Credit Suisse, number two in the Swiss banking sector, has been rocked by a series of scandals over the past year. In March, the bank was shattered by the bankruptcy of the financial company Greensill, in which some $10 billion had been committed through four funds, then by the implosion of the American fund Archegos which cost some $5 billion. dollars in the bank.
- Why did no Swiss media take part in the revelations?
“The legal risk was simply too great.” Even TX, the largest private media group in Switzerland, explained that it had given up participating in this investigation, believing that its journalists risk prison.
Thus, the Geneva Grandstand, one of the most prestigious titles of the TX group (Tamedia), explained on Sunday that “a modification of the law on banks, which took place in 2015, prevents journalists from working with bank data resulting from a leak, even when they are in the public interest”. Article 47 of this law provides for up to 3 years in prison for anyone who “reveals a secret entrusted to him […] or exploits this secret for its benefit or for the benefit of a third party”.
In an editorial, Ariane Drayer, editor-in-chief of Tamedia, underlines that we are talking about dirty money, stemming from crime and protests: “In our country, in the 21st century, when a journalist reports this money there, it is heavily punishable. It is inadmissible.”