The purpose of this paper is to offer a preliminary comparison of the formation of money laundering and terrorist finance norms through international conventions and through Security Council resolutions.
The formation of a global approach to criminal finance through the negotiation of international conventions is compared to the creation of a standardized approach through intervention by the United Nations Security Council.
While the formation of norms through the Security Council is efficient, it risks jeopardizing the legitimacy of the institution. Formation through conventions, with the assistance of soft‐actors, however at times glacial, is preferred.
The paper implies that the Security Council should seriously restrict any involvement in creating global norms attentive to terrorist funding.
The paper critiques global money laundering, and terrorist finance laws through the unique prism of norm formation. It demonstrates that the imperfect process of norm development through international conventions offers more promise than Security Council lead development.
