Archive

Posts Tagged ‘FARC’

Richard Chichakli Arrested and Facing IEEPA Charges for Alleged Association with ‘Merchant of Death’

Last Thursday, the Southern District of New York announced the arrest of Richard Ammar Chichakli in Australia. Chichakli has been charged with violations under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), money laundering, wire fraud, and conspiracy.

It is alleged that Chichakli is an associate of Viktor Bout, dubbed the “Merchant of Death” by law enforcement authorities and the press for his dealings in international arms trafficking. Bout allegedly established an international network to facilitate arms trafficking, and furnished arms to the former regime of Charles Taylor in Liberia. Bout was convicted in November 2011 in the Southern District of New York for allegedly selling weapons to the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia, FARC, and is currently serving his 25-year sentence.

Chichakli’s indictment focuses mainly on his alleged connections to Bout’s network of arms trafficking. The U.S. Government believes that Chichakli assisted in the management and operations of several of Bout’s airline companies that facilitated the transportation of illegal weaponry. The U.S. followed the lead of the United Nations, in that once the U.N. Security Council designated Chichakli in 2004, the U.S. followed thereafter. On April 26, 2005, Chichakli was placed on the Specially Designated Nationals List (SDN List) by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) under the Liberia sanctions program.

The indictment alleges that in order to evade U.S. sanctions, Chichakli pursued airline operations under the guise of the names of others, and used the airline, named Samar Airlines, to engage in the transportation of illegal arms. It is further alleged that Chichakli attempted to purchase two airplanes from a U.S. aviation company. The indictment also cites money laundering, wire fraud, and conspiracy for the transfer funds in the amount of $1.7 million related to arms trafficking that passed through the U.S. financial system.

The U.S. has pursued Chichakli for years, and finally arrested him with the help of Australian authorities. Chichakli could have benefited from attempting to contact the U.S. Government first and contesting his designation through a formal administrative process. Pursuing a request for reconsideration through OFAC allows a designated person or entity to contest the designation and also provide reasons and evidence in support of the wrongful designation.

At this point, Chichakli is facing multiple federal charges that are rooted in IEEPA violations. The national security implications alone are difficult to overcome. If Chichakli argues that he did not engage in the overt acts willfully, and attacks the circumstantial evidence against him, it might work in his favor. The other course of action, which may be his best option, is to begin plea negotiations. If he can provide substantial assistance to the U.S. Government, his ultimate sentence may be reduced.

The author of this blog is Erich Ferrari, an attorney specializing in Federal Criminal Defense matters. If you have any questions please contact him at 202-280-6370 or ferrari@ferrariassociatespc.com.

Bookmark and Share

New York District Court Sentences Viktor Bout to 25 Years in Prison

Yesterday in the Southern District of New York, a federal judge sentenced Viktor Bout, aka the “Merchant of Death,” to 25 years in prison and also ordered a $15 million dollar forfeiture. The sentencing of Bout comes several months after a three-week jury trial which concluded in November 2011.

The investigation of Bout began in late 2007 as part of a sting operation. Before the official investigation had begun, Bout had been listed on the Specially Designated Nationals List (SDN List), administered by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), in 2004. To build a case against Bout, the U.S. government used two confidential sources to go undercover and try to elicit an arms deal with him. Specifically, the U.S. agents allegedly made an arrangement for Bout to provide arms to the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia or FARC) in order to facilitate an attack on American helicopters.

The method of arrest of Bout sparked international attention. In 2008, the U.S. agents were able to convince Bout to a meeting in Thailand, where he arrested shortly thereafter. Thailand, caught in the middle between a political battle between the U.S. and Russia for approximately two years while Bout was being held there, ultimately granted the United States’ request to extradite Bout in order to face prosecution.

Bout was prosecuted and convicted on charges of conspiring to kill U.S. nationals, U.S. officers and employees, conspiring to acquire and export anti-aircraft missiles, and conspiring to provide material support to a designated foreign terrorist organization, FARC. The crime of conspiracy is complete when one intentionally enters the conspiracy and commits an overt act in furtherance thereof. The crime that is the object of the conspiracy need not come to fruition. In other words, the U.S. government’s case hinged on the fact that they were able to get Bout to agree to provide arms to FARC, and were able to indict him once he committed an act in furtherance of the agreement.

Prosecutors sought life in prison for Bout; however, U.S. District Judge Shira A. Scheindlin disagreed with such a sentence and imposed only the mandatory minimum of 25 years in prison. As indicated by her comments, the judge was obviously concerned with the manner in which the case came about, mainly the fact that U.S. agents approached Bout in a planned sting operation, not the other way around. There was no evidence to support the assertion that Bout would have ever committed a crime punishable under U.S. law if he had not been lured in by U.S. agents.

Despite the high publicity of this case, including the international implications, the judge was able to look at the evidence and issue a reasonable sentence. Bout still maintains his innocence, and will most likely continue this case on to the appellate level.

The author of this blog is Erich Ferrari, an attorney specializing in Federal Criminal Defense matters. If you have any questions please contact him at 202-280-6370 or ferrari@ferrari-legal.com.

Bookmark and Share

Accused Member of Foreign Terrorist Organization Extradited to United States on Hostage Taking Charges

The Department of Justice announced on March 12, 2012 that Alexander Beltran Herrera, a/k/a Jhon Beltrain Herrera, a/k/a Rodrigo Pirinolo, an accused member of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (“FARC”), has been extradited from Colombia to face hostage taking and terrorism charges in the United States.

The indictment alleges that the FARC is an armed and violent organization in the Republic of Colombia. The indictment further alleges that the FARC is a “highly structured criminal organization” divided into seven geographic “blocks” — the Caribbean block, the Northwestern block, the Middle Magdalena block, the Central block, the Eastern block, the Western block, and the Southern block — which are each further subdivided into a number of Fronts and named Mobile Columns. The indictment specifically alleges that Mr. Herrera was a member of the 27th Front in the FARC’s Southern block and committed various crimes against the United States as a member of FARC.

For example, according to the indictment, in 2004 the 27th Front allegedly held three Americans for nearly two years. The indictment also alleges that Mr. Herrera was one of the FARC “jailers” who used “choke harnesses, chains, padlocks, and wires to bind the necks and wrists” of American hostages. In addition to these alleged acts, Mr. Herrera was charged with the following specific offenses: 18 U.S.C. 1203(a) (Conspiracy to Commit Hostage Taking); 18 U.S.C. 1203(a),(2) (Hostage Taking; Aiding and Abetting and Causing an Act to be Done); 18 U.S.C. 924(c),(2) (Using and Carrying a Firearm During a Crime of Violence; Aiding and Abetting and Causing an Act to be Done); 18 U.S.C. 2339A (Conspiracy to Provide Material Support to Terrorists); 18 U.S.C. 2339B (Conspiracy to Provide Material Support or Resources to a Designated Foreign Terrorist Organization).

When an individual located in a foreign country has been indicted by a federal grand jury the United States will attempt to compel the government of that country to turn that individual over into the custody of the United States. This request will usually be pursuant to an extradition treaty between the United States and that foreign country. The extradition request is formally made with the foreign government’s embassy in the United States. Additionally, this formal request is made by the U.S. Department of State, not Justice. The U.S. will likely accompany this formal request with a copy of the indictment, arrest warrant, relevant statutes, a photograph of the accused, and the affidavit of an investigating officer on the case.

When this request is made, the terms of the treaty dictate whether the foreign government will agree to turn over the individual into the custody of the United States. Accordingly, most extradition treaties must satisfy a legal concept known as dual criminality. Dual criminality means that the offenses being charged by the requesting country must also be considered punishable offenses in the other country. This very requirement exists in Article 2(1)(a) of the extradition treaty between the United States and Colombia.

The author of this blog is Erich Ferrari, an attorney specializing in Federal Criminal Defense matters. If you have any questions please contact him at 202-280-6370 or ferrari@ferrari-legal.com.

Bookmark and Share
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 123 other followers