A growing rift between the British Virgin Islands (BVI) and the UK government has erupted over proposals for a new corporate ownership register, with MPs accusing the territory of attempting to shield financial criminals from scrutiny. The dispute threatens to escalate into a constitutional showdown as pressure mounts on the UK to intervene.

The controversy centres on the BVI’s proposed system for disclosing company ownership information. While overseas territories, including the BVI, have committed to introducing publicly accessible registers of beneficial ownership (PARBOs), critics argue that the new measures would render it nearly impossible to uncover the true owners of firms registered in the islands.

MPs Joe Powell and Andrew Mitchell, who co-chair the all-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption and responsible tax, have written to BVI Premier Natalio Wheatley, condemning the plan as a “shameful bid” to protect illicit financial activities. The former development minister Mitchell went further, accusing the BVI of attempting to “continue to manage stolen funds and assist in money laundering from sources close to the sex trade and the drugs trade.”

Under the BVI’s proposed system, only individuals involved in legal or regulatory proceedings related to financial crime could request ownership information. Additionally, the owners of companies would be notified of such requests and granted five days to object before any details are shared. Critics argue this provision would alert criminals to impending investigations, allowing them to move assets before authorities can act.

“This could expose journalists to legal or physical intimidation when investigating high-risk stories on drug cartels, kleptocrats, or human traffickers,” the MPs wrote in their letter. The proposals also require applicants to already know the identity of a company’s owner before requesting ownership details—an approach described as a “logical impossibility” by Mitchell and Powell.

The UK Foreign Office is reportedly dissatisfied with the BVI’s proposals and has urged the territory to revise its approach. Foreign Secretary David Lammy has prioritised efforts to combat illicit finance, with the issue of public ownership registers featuring prominently in recent talks with overseas territories. British officials made their stance clear during a summit with the territories in November.

Transparency International, a leading anti-corruption group, has echoed concerns raised by MPs, warning that the BVI’s policy could undermine global efforts to combat financial crime. Lawmakers are set to debate the progress of PARBOs in a Westminster Hall session on Wednesday, with the BVI’s approach expected to be a focal point of discussions.

There is growing speculation that the UK government could resort to an “order in council” to compel the BVI to comply. The measure, rarely used to preserve the self-governance of overseas territories, has been previously invoked to abolish the death penalty and decriminalise homosexuality in British territories.

The BVI government has declined to comment on the criticisms but has previously stated its commitment to transparency and tackling financial crime. It has argued that open registers require a “tailored approach” depending on the jurisdiction.

Source: TheGuardian.com

In the first week of his presidency, Donald Trump has enacted a series of aggressive immigration policies targeting Latin American migrants, leading to significant diplomatic tensions and widespread concern across the region.

One of the administration’s initial actions was the suspension of the CBP One application, a tool previously used by asylum seekers to schedule appointments at U.S. ports of entry. This move has left thousands of migrants in limbo, uncertain about their legal pathways into the United States.

Concurrently, the U.S. has initiated mass deportations, utilizing military aircraft to return migrants to their countries of origin. This approach has been met with resistance. Colombian President Gustavo Petro refused entry to two U.S. military flights carrying deported Colombians, citing concerns over the dignified treatment of migrants. In response, President Trump announced retaliatory measures, including a 25% tariff on Colombian imports and the suspension of visa services in Bogotá.

Mexico has also taken a stand, denying permission for a U.S. military plane carrying deported migrants to land. This decision reflects broader regional apprehension about the U.S.’s deportation tactics and their potential humanitarian implications.

In anticipation of increased deportations, Mexican border states are preparing shelters to accommodate returning migrants. Cities like Ciudad Juárez have erected structures to house deportees, while other border towns are undertaking similar initiatives to manage the expected influx. Brazil has condemned the deportation of 88 of its citizens from the U.S., citing reports of degrading treatment, including passengers being handcuffed during the flight. The deportees, initially bound for Belo Horizonte, were redirected to Manaus due to technical issues, where Brazilian officials intervened to remove the handcuffs. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva arranged for a Brazilian Air Force aircraft to complete their journey, emphasizing the need for humane treatment. Brazil’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs has demanded explanations from the U.S., marking escalating tensions amid the recent wave of deportations across Latin America.

The aggressive deportation push has strained U.S. relations with its Latin American neighbors. Many leaders argue that the policy disregards the complexities of migration, including economic hardships and violence driving people to leave their home countries.

Experts predict that this diplomatic fallout could have lasting effects on U.S.-Latin American relations, particularly as countries like Colombia and Brazil reassess their economic and political ties with Washington.