The Mauritius FIU has reiterated and updated its guidance on PEP identification and risk management.

The Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) of Mauritius has reiterated and updated guidance on PEP identification and risk management to strengthen compliance across reporting persons (financial institutions and DNFBPs), in line with the FIAMLR 2018 framework and FATF Recommendations 12 (PEPs) and 22 (DNFBPs).

• https://www.fiumauritius.org/fiu/?p=5603

The guidance emphasises that PEP measures are preventive and require robust CDD, EDD, and ongoing monitoring, and should not be interpreted as labelling all PEPs as criminals.  ,  

The FIU’s public materials explicitly underscore that effective CDD and a risk-based approach are foundational to determining whether customers or beneficial owners are PEPs and to calibrating controls accordingly.  

Comsure briefing:

• Below is a full, regulator-aligned briefing on the Mauritius FIU guidance on the treatment of Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) under the Financial Intelligence and Anti-Money Laundering Regulations 2018 (FIAMLR), aligned with FATF Recommendations 12 and 22.

Definition of PEPs under FIAMLR (Regulation 2)

Regulation 2 of FIAMLR 2018 defines PEP categories and provides the statutory basis for Mauritius-specific implementation:  

• Domestic PEPs – Individuals who are or have been entrusted with prominent public functions in Mauritius, including heads of state or government, senior politicians, senior government/judicial/military officials, senior executives of state-owned corporations, and senior party officials.  
• Foreign PEPs – Individuals who are or have been entrusted with prominent public functions by a foreign country, including heads of state or government, senior politicians, senior government/judicial/military officials, senior executives of state-owned corporations, and senior party officials.  
• International Organisation PEPs – Individuals who are or have been entrusted with a prominent function in an international organisation, including members of senior management such as directors, deputy directors, and board members or equivalent functions.  
• Family Members of PEPs – Individuals related to a PEP by blood or through marriage or similar (civil) partnerships.  
• Close Associates of PEPs – Individuals closely connected to a PEP socially or professionally; they are also deemed PEPs due to potential abuse of relationships for ML/TF purposes.  

FIAMLR 2018 is publicly available via the FIU site and the Bank of Mauritius, confirming the legal scope and terminology applicable to reporting persons.  ,,

Why PEPs Matter (Risk Rationale)

FATF guidance recognises that PEPs have heightened exposure to bribery and corruption risks due to their position and influence, necessitating additional preventive measures; these measures should not be misinterpreted as implying that PEPs engage in criminal activity per se.  ,  

The FIU’s Mauritius guidance mirrors FATF principles, stressing that refusing a relationship solely because a client is a PEP is contrary to FATF Recommendation 12, and that the risk‑based approach must determine whether the relationship can be managed safely with adequate controls.  

Key Regulatory Obligations (FIAMLR Regulations 12 & 15)

In addition to standard CDD, reporting persons must implement the following for PEP relationships, pursuant to FIAMLR and FATF guidance:  

1. Determine PEP status of customers and beneficial owners, including family members and close associates, through effective CDD and external sources where appropriate.  ,  
2. Obtain senior management approval prior to establishing or continuing business relationships with PEPs (foreign, domestic, and international organisation PEPs), reflecting the higher risk profile.  ,  
3. Establish source of wealth and source of funds for the PEP relationship, documenting assessments and corroborating evidence commensurate with risk.  
4. Apply Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD) proportionate to the PEP’s risk level (including screening, adverse media checks, extended verification, senior approvals, and periodic refresh).  
5. Conduct enhanced ongoing monitoring of PEP transactions and behaviours, including higher‑frequency reviews and dynamic risk‑rating updates.  
6. Maintain a PEP register and related documentation (decisions, approvals, evidence, periodic reviews) to demonstrate governance and audit trail integrity.  

Note: FIAMLR 2018 sets the legal framework; FATF guidance provides interpretive and practical detail (e.g., red flags, external sources of information, and treatment of time limits).  ,  

Treatment of Time Limits & Ongoing Status

FATF guidance clarifies that PEP status may apply to individuals who no longer hold the public function; institutions should assess ongoing risk rather than rely on arbitrary time limits, taking into account exposure, residual influence, and connections.  

FIU Mauritius’ public materials echo that risk‑based assessment determines whether the relationship can be maintained safely; arbitrary refusals based solely on PEP status are discouraged.  

Practical Implementation – Core Controls

To operationalise FIAMLR and FATF expectations for PEPs, institutions should:

A. Identification & Screening

• Implement PEP screening across onboarding, periodic reviews, and trigger events; calibrate lists to include domestic, foreign, and international organisation PEPs, plus family members and close associates.  ,  
• Maintain documented CDD procedures aligning with FIAMLR definitions and FATF recommendations; ensure adverse media and public source checks.  ,  

B. Governance & Senior Approval

• Require senior management approval before onboarding or continuing PEP relationships; record decisions, rationale, and risk mitigants.  

C. Source of Wealth (SoW) & Source of Funds (SoF)

• Establish SoW/SoF through independent, credible evidence (asset declarations, business interests, verified income flows).  

D. Enhanced Ongoing Monitoring

• Apply EDD monitoring, including higher‑risk triggers (unusual transactions, use of complex structures, connections to higher‑risk jurisdictions) and periodic reviews.  

E. Record‑Keeping & PEP Register

• Maintain a PEP register and ensure clear audit trails: screening hits, decisions, approvals, document references, and review dates.  

Sector‑Specific Reinforcement (FIU 2026 Updates)

The FIU’s January 2026 publications (e.g., Guidelines for DPMS) demonstrate ongoing reinforcement of AML/CFT controls, aligning DNFBPs and financial institutions with FIAMLA / FIAMLR obligations and UN sanctions obligations; while sector-specific, these guidelines reflect the regulator’s emphasis on EDD, risk-based approaches, and prompt reporting, consistent with the PEP guidance.  ,  

Public commentary in Mauritius in January 2026 also references the PEP guidance's emphasis (including EDD, senior approval, and risk-based acceptance), evidencing the FIU’s outreach to industry.  

What This Means for Institutions (Board & MLRO Takeaways)

• Risk-based acceptance: Do not automatically reject PEPs; assess whether the institution can manage legal, reputational, and AML/CFT risks within its risk appetite. Document the decision and mitigants.  ,  
• Evidence-based controls: Robust SoW/SoF, screening, governance, and monitoring must be demonstrable; generic or unsupported assertions will not withstand supervisory scrutiny.  
• Alignment with FIAMLR & FATF: Ensure policies and procedures explicitly map to Regulation 2 definitions and to the additional measures in Recommendations 12 and 22.  ,  
• Registers & audit trails: Maintain a PEP register and a complete audit trail of decisions, approvals, reviews, and evidence.
• Training & awareness: Deliver role-specific AML/CFT training focused on PEP risk indicators, red flags, and escalation pathways.  

Suggested Internal Actions (Immediate)

1. Policy review – Update AML/CFT policy sections on PEPs to reflect FIAMLR definitions and FATF guidance; include family members and close associates explicitly.  ,  
2. CDD Procedures – Embed PEP identification steps across onboarding and periodic reviews; define SoW/SoF required by risk tier.  
3. Senior Management Approval Workflow – Formalise approvals (forms, rationale), and connect to the PEP register.  
4. Monitoring Rules – Enhance thresholds and typologies for PEPs (layering, complex corporate vehicles, public‑office conflicts).  
5. Training – Provide targeted training to onboarding teams, MLRO, and relationship managers on PEP identification and EDD.  

Sources (Web Links)

• https://www.fiumauritius.org/fiu/?p=5603

• FIU Mauritius – PEP “Tip of the Month” (April 2021) – definitions, RBA, family/associates, and principle that PEP status alone should not trigger refusalfiumauritius.org – Tip of the Month: PEP
• FIAMLR 2018 – Official text (FIU and Bank of Mauritius) – statutory basis incl. Reg. 2 definitions and CDD/EDD obligationsFIU – FIAMLR PDF • Bank of Mauritius – FIAMLR 2018
• FATF Guidance – PEPs (Recommendations 12 and 22) – preventive measures, RBA, red flags, time‑limit treatmentFATF: PEP Guidance page • FATF: Guidance PDF (June 2013)
• FIU Mauritius – Latest & sector updates (e.g., DPMS Guidelines, Jan 2026; FIU role as AML/CFT regulator for DNFBPs)FIU – Guidelines for DPMS (Jan 2026) • FIU – Latest updates & role
• Industry references to recent FIU guidance (Jan 2026) reinforcing PEP/EDD expectations
  LinkedIn – Rosemont Mauritius • LinkedIn – Shivdhun Gokool