RegTech — What the AML Law Actually Requires
Regulatory technology — software systems that help accountable persons perform their duties of preventing money laundering and terrorism financing — is most effective when built on the exact requirements of the law. The Georgian Law on Facilitating the Suppression of Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing defines five directions in this field: the recording and submission of information (Article 7), the manner and deadlines of submission (Article 26), the retention periods (Article 27), the compliance-control system (Article 29) and the group-level architecture (Article 30). This page explains these requirements from an engineering standpoint — what a system must deliver to be lawful.
Article 7 — Recording and Statistical Submission
Article 7 obliges the competent body, within its authority, to record and — at the request of the working group, within a reasonable time — to submit detailed statistical information: the number of reports submitted and selected for analysis, data exchanged with financial intelligence services of other jurisdictions, statistics of investigations and judgments, a list of seized property, and the number and types of inspections conducted by supervisory bodies. The systematic processing of this data is precisely the regulatory-technology layer that gives the authorities a systemic picture — and the accountable person's internal systems are the first link of this chain.
Article 26 — the Manner and Deadlines of Submission
Article 26 provides that reports and other information are submitted to the Financial Monitoring Service electronically or in writing, in the manner established by a subordinate act of the head of the Service — and here opens the main purpose of regulatory technology: the capacity of electronic transmission. The deadlines are strict: the report provided for the case where a grounded suspicion arises must be submitted to the Service on the very day the suspicion arises; information connected with the movement of cash or securities across the customs border of Georgia — no later than 5 working days from the movement; and information provided upon request — no later than 2 working days. A system that cannot support these deadlines fails a statutory requirement — which is why deadline control is part of the technological architecture, not a secondary detail.