Plain-English summaryThis chapter describes efforts by the Office of Independent Counsel and the Department of Justice to recover approximately $7.8 million in Enterprise funds frozen in Swiss bank accounts since December 1986. Recovery was complicated by the dismissal of conspiracy and fraud charges against key figures after the Reagan Administration refused to declassify defense materials, leading Swiss authorities to deny the restitution request. The report notes that competing claims were filed by figures such as Albert Hakim and Richard Secord, and that the Justice Department's Civil Division ultimately initiated civil proceedings to pursue the frozen funds.
Key line (verbatim from the document)“At the time of this report to the court, the Enterprise funds, plus several million dollars in interest that has accrued since December 1986, remain frozen in Switzerland”
Summary written with AI help from the document text and checked against it; the key line is matched word for word to the text. Read the original before citing.
Full text (3,951 characters)
Walsh Iran / Contra Report - Chapter 12 U.S. Efforts To Recover the Enterprise Funds
Chapter 12
U.S. Efforts To Recover the Enterprise Funds
In December 1986, before Independent Counsel was appointed, the Swiss government at the
request of the Department of Justice froze the Enterprise accounts maintained in Switzerland.
Sixteen accounts contained funds totaling $7.8 million. While the initial U.S. request for
assistance included a request for return of the funds, Independent Counsel's efforts to recover the
funds for the United States began in earnest in early 1989, after the bank account records of the
Enterprise had been obtained under the Swiss-American Treaty on Mutual Assistance in
Criminal Matters and after the indictments of Lt. Col. Oliver L. North, Vice Adm. John M.
Poindexter, retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Richard V. Secord and Albert Hakim were secured.
In Switzerland, the request for the return of the funds was before the Federal Office for Police
Matters. The Office of Independent Counsel made its request through the Justice Department's
Office of International Affairs.
Under the mutual assistance treaty, the U.S. request for the return of the funds had to be based
on crimes recognized by Swiss law. In the Iran/contra request, the crimes were conspiracy to
defraud and embezzlement, which corresponded to Counts One and Two of the indictment
brought in March 1988 against North, Poindexter, Secord and Hakim. These counts were
eventually dropped because the Reagan Administration refused to declassify certain information
the court deemed relevant to the defense of North.1 It was Independent Counsel's position,
however, that the evidence it had provided to the Swiss authorities was sufficient to prove that a
fraud on the U.S. Government had occurred.2
1 Although as part of the Hakim plea agreement, Lake Resources Inc. in November 1989
pleaded guilty to a corporate felony of defrauding the U.S. Government in the Iran/contra
diversion, Swiss law does not recognize corporate criminality. The Lake Resources guilty plea,
therefore, could not support Independent Counsel's request for return of the funds.
2 The standard of proof in the Swiss courts in this matter was ``reasonable suspicion.'' The
indictment and Judge Gerhard A. Gesell's upholding of Count One as a crime met the standard of
proof.
Challenging the U.S. request for return of the funds were claims in Switzerland reportedly
made by Secord, Hakim, Willard Zucker, and Hakim attorney Phillippe Neyroud. Although
Hakim, after his criminal plea in November 1989, agreed to settle his claim for $1.7 million of
the funds and to settle the claims of others within that amount, he later reneged on the agreement.
In February 1992, the Federal Office for Police Matters advised the Office of Independent
Counsel that it would not return the funds to the United States because the conspiracy and
embezzlement charges had been dismissed. Independent Counsel's appeal of the ruling was
rejected by the Swiss Federal Tribunal on grounds that the United States had no standing to
appeal.3
3 Decision, Proceeding Nos. 1A.125/1992 and 1A.233/1992 (Swiss Federal Tribunal Mar. 29,
1993).
Independent Counsel had received the assistance of Richard Owen in the Criminal Division of
the Department of Justice. In 1992 OIC requested, pursuant to the Independent Counsel Act, that
the Department of Justice's Civil Division take over the matter in the Swiss civil courts.4 It at
first declined. It then assigned a liaison attorney. With the change of Administration, it has now
aggressively undertaken efforts to recover the stolen funds. That litigation is pending. At the
time of this report to the court, the Enterprise funds, plus several million dollars in interest that
has accrued since December 1986, remain frozen in Switzerland.
4 28 U.S.C. 596(b)(2), (1987) P.L. 101-191, 101 Stat. 1305.