Latest news with #SIC
Finextra
a day ago
- Business
- Finextra
Banking Circle gets direct access to Swiss Interbank Clearing system
As part of its continued ambition to become a leading global clearing provider, Banking Circle has today significantly strengthened its embedded financial infrastructure with direct access to the Swiss Interbank Clearing (SIC) system. 0 This latest development represents major progress in the bank's mission to build a global payments platform with interoperability at its core and deliver instant, low-cost, scalable cross-border solutions across Europe. With this new capability, Banking Circle clients can now benefit from comprehensive support for both Real-Time Gross Settlement (RTGS) and Automated Clearing House (ACH) transactions in Swiss Francs (CHF), coupled with access to Liechtenstein-issued VIBAN accounts designed to provide full operational control and compliance alignment. This new CHF payment solution delivers three core benefits: • Direct access to domestic and cross-border CHF payments: A fully integrated, real-time connection to Liechtenstein and Switzerland payment schemes via the SIC system • Seamless account management: Efficient and scalable account infrastructure using Liechtenstein-issued VIBANs tailored to clients' operational, regulatory, and market-specific needs • Multi-currency reach via single API: Access to multiple local schemes and local IBAN or account capabilities in Euros (EUR), Pound Sterling (GBP), Danish Krone (DKK), Swedish Krona (SEK), and Australian Dollars (AUD) via one single API integration - with more to come in 2025 and beyond The addition of CHF means Banking Circle now provides direct access to local payment schemes and local account infrastructure for five of the twelve major currencies in Europe and the UK, reinforcing the company's market-leading position for real-time payments in multiple currencies. This quota also reflects its ambition to become a super-correspondent bank for global B2B that removes barriers currently holding back market demand from European businesses for instant payment flows and enhances financial inclusion across the continent. "This is another clear signal that the market wants to see improvement in global payments infrastructure and we intend to be the go-to payments bank for financial institutions across Europe looking for simplified, accelerated, real-time transactions said Laust Bertelsen, Chief Executive Officer at Banking Circle. "CHF is a major piece in solving that puzzle - and now clients can have direct access to that system through our single API tech-first platform which drives seamless customer experiences, transparency, control and reduces cost and complexity across their payment value chain.' The CHF solution is live now, with full commercial rollout underway. Banking Circle's expansion continues in line with its long-term strategy to build an international clearing network that supports the needs of businesses operating across multiple geographies. The company remains focused on delivering financial infrastructure that unlocks new business models and drives the next generation of payments in Europe and beyond. As more businesses and payment systems come online within Banking Circle's payments platform, its customers will benefit from ever-greater levels of speed and efficiency. From onboarding to transaction, clients can now manage their payment flows across five key European currencies through a single integration - reducing fragmentation, removing reliance on sponsor banks, and helping financial institutions of all sizes to thrive in a real-time economy.
The National
2 days ago
- Politics
- The National
Yes party leaders urged to stand against genocide in Gaza
The non-party affiliated Scottish Independence Convention (SIC) called on Yessers to condemn the Israeli atrocities against the Palestinian people and 'take every action possible to inhibit those atrocities from continuing'. It comes as at least 31 people were killed and more than 170 wounded while on their way to receive food in the Gaza Strip, according to health officials and multiple witnesses. The SIC wrote to Yes party leaders on May 25 to ask them to sign the pledge. Only the Alba party confirmed to The National that they would be signing and supporting the contents of the letter. READ MORE: UK Government response to Israel 'gravely inadequate', 15 human rights groups say The letter calls for pro-independence party leaders to condemn the Gaza genocide in the 'strongest possible terms' and 'commit to sanctioning Israel where possible and to pushing all Scottish business and suppliers to divest from Israeli products'. It also calls for Israel to be banned from taking part in international events such as football championships and Eurovision, as well as divesting Scottish Government and local authority pension schemes to any companies who have links to arming Israel. The letter also asks Yes leadrs to 'commit to doing all within their power to uphold international law and to arresting anyone suspected of war crimes that steps on Scottish soil, support and promote the key organisations and the United Nations offering aid to the Palestinian people; demand that the UK Government do the same, sanction Israel, end any complicity and end all arms trading with Israel without exception'. The SIC calls for the commitments listed to remain in place until a 'permanent treaty for peace is established' and Palestine is 'formally recognised by Israel and the international community as a free and independent nation state'. 'The offer to sign up in acceptance will first be put to all the leaders of the major pro-independence political parties with elected representatives,' the SIC added. READ MORE: Scots minister hits back at Defence Secretary 'student union politics' jibe 'If they ignore or refuse to sign we will put it to the next most senior person in the party and so on, so forth. 'Any political party, party leader, MSP or MP who signs up will be commended for their humanity.' The National understands that First Minister John Swinney was approached to sign the letter. Swinney previously condemned Israel for blocking aid entering Gaza, and said there was a 'need to end the conflict' in discussions with Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Alba leader Kenny MacAskill, said: "I confirm the full support and endorsement by Alba Party for your call. A genocide is being perpetrated and we cannot stand idly by. "Independence remains our goal but as you detail that neither precludes comment and indeed humanity dictates its requirements." It comes as witnesses said Israeli forces fired on crowds around 1000 yards from a new aid site run by an Israeli-US-backed foundation. Israel's military said in a statement that its forces did not fire at civilians near or within the site, citing an initial inquiry. Before Sunday, 17 people were killed while trying to reach the sites set up to distribute aid, according to Zaher al-Waheidi, head of the Health Ministry's records department.
Business Recorder
4 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Reserved seats: ECP says majority judgement premised on ‘erroneous conclusion'
ISLAMABAD: The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) submitted the majority judgement in the reserved seats case is premised on the erroneous conclusion that Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) in addition to Sunni Ittehad Council(SIC) was before the Supreme Court of Pakistan (SC) and both sought allocation of the disputed reserved seats to 'SIC or to PTI'. Barrister Sikandar Bashir Mohmand filed seven formulations before the Constitution Bench, which is hearing the review against the SC judgment on reserved seats. He said that the PTI in its CMA 5913/ 2024 filed on 26-6-2024 did not pray for allocation of the reserve seats to 'PTI itself' or to 'either PTI or SIC'; instead PTI asserted; 'the denial by the ECP of reserve seats to the SIC will result in the national assembly and the provincial assemblies losing their representative character. These seats cannot be allowed to any other party.' The ECP submitted that CMA 5913/ 2024 is stated to have been filed under Order XXXIII Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules, 1980 (inherit powers of SCP) and not under Order V Rule 2 (2) which is the relevant Rule for an application for striking out or adding a party. Therefore, PTI did not formally seek 'impleadment' in Civil Appeals 333 and 334 of 2024. The majority judgement incorrectly describes CMA 5913/ 2024 as 'PTI's application for impleadment'. As PTI was evidently not party to proceedings before the ECP, PHC and SCP, no relief could have been lawfully granted to it, even by exercising power under Article 187 (1) of the Constitution. It submitted that the provisions of Article 51 and the Article 106 have been misconstrued in the majority judgement, which inter alia has distorted the scheme of the provisions of Article 51 and Article 106 as read with Section 104 of the Elections Act, 2017 and the Election Rules, 2017. The ECP stated that it is an essential component of the scheme of the provisions of Article 51 and Article 106 that the List of Priority for Seats Reserved for Women and Non-Muslims (Form 66) of each political party, as well as, the nomination papers for candidates in such list must be submitted and scrutinised prior to polling day and in parallel with filing and scrutiny of nomination papers of candidates contesting on general seats. The rationale being that the electors have notice of the candidates of the concerned 'political party' who may be elected on reserve seats before polling day. The direction in paragraph 9 of the majority judgement allowing the filing of the List of Priority for Seats Reserved for Women and Non-Muslims (Form 66) after the election has concluded and returned candidates have been notified is in conflict with the Election Programme and the democratic objective and rationale. The ECP stated that the timelines prescribed in paragraph 8 and 9 could only lawfully be prescribed by Parliament through legislation amending Article 51 Provisions (and Article 106 provisions), as well as, Sections 51, 66, 67 and 104 of the Elections Act, 2017. The said timelines could also not be prescribed without striking down the Election Programme dated 15-12-2023 as amended on 22-12-2023 read with Section 104 of the Elections Act, 2017. The ECP submitted that the power to 'alter' the Election Programme vests solely with the ECP under Section 58 of the Elections Act, 2017 read with Article 218 (3) and Article 219 (d), as well as, the last sentence of Article 222 of the Constitution. Therefore, in any event such timelines could not be prescribed by the SCP, even under Article 187 (1) of the Constitution. It contended that the timelines given in paragraphs 8-9 of the Majority Short Order are directly in conflict with the scheme and timeline in the Article 51 Provisions and also sections 51, 66, 67 and 104 of the Elections Act, 2017. Therefore, same could not be given in exercise of power under Article 187(1). Since PTI was not a party to proceedings before the ECP, PHC and SCP and neither did it make an express prayer for allocation of the Disputed Reserve Seats to itself, this specific matter was never 'a case or matter pending before it' in terms of Article 187 (1) in consequently relief to PTI by invoking Article 187 (1) is impermissible.' Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
5 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Reserved seats case: Ruling ‘amended' constitution, says constitutional bench
ISLAMABAD: The Constitutional Bench observed that majority judgment in reserved seats case amended the constitution, as three days mentioned in the constitution for joining a political party by independents in Parliament is increased to 15 days. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar questioned whether the judges should be concerned with what is written in the constitution and the law or the extraneous factors? He noted that constitution was re-written and there is history because it was done in the case of Article 63A of the constitution too. He said when the law is clear then there is no need of 'read in' or 'read down', and the Court has to adhere to the provisions. An 11-member Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court (SC), headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, on Thursday, heard the review petitions of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Peoples' Party (PPP) and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). Reserved seats case: SIC lawyer proposes three sets of relief The proceeding was live-streamed on SC's YouTube channel. Justice Musarrat Hilali said that they majority [judgment] has discussed 13th January 2025 judgment, which review has been pending. Justice Ali Baqar Najafi said they (the majority) have expressed their mind, while alluding to the fact of the case. He asked what the oath of a judge says, and what is expected of him to deliver judgment on the basis of principles or law? Faisal Siddiqui, representing SIC, argued that 11 judges, including Justice (retired) Qazi Faez, Justice Mandokhail and Justice Yahya Afridi, in their verdicts maintained that all the independent candidates are Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) members and the PTI is entitled to 78 reserved seats of women and non-Muslims in the National and the provincial assemblies. He requested the bench to dismiss the reviews petition, in which, additional grounds have not been filed. However, Justice Amin told him that the review petitions have been filed only against the majority judgment, while the judgments of other judges are intact. Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail said: 'We (Justice Jamal and ex-CJP Qazi Faez) have maintained that only those independent candidates who in their nomination papers mentioned PTI and attached the party are the PTI members in the parliament.' He questioned how they can compel anyone who has contested election as an independent to join a particular party, or force anyone not to contest election as an independent. Faisal argued that all the 13 judges held that the PTI-backed independent candidates cannot join the SIC, and also reserved seats cannot be given to it. However, they maintained that the PTI was entitled to the reserved seats, adding the disagreement was on the number of PTI-affiliated candidates. The judges also disagreed with the majority judgment on timeline and the process described for joining the PTI by the independents, the SIC counsel submitted. He said that Justice Yahya had left this issue to be decided by the ECP. Justice Amin said whether any of the party during the original proceedings discussed that the reserved seats should be given to the PTI. Justice Mandokhail questioned whether only one and not all the political parties deserve fair treatment? Justice Musarrat Hilali questioned that Hamid Raza who had established the SIC in 2013 and has been its chairman then why he contested general elections as an independent instead of on the SIC platform, and after winning the election joined the SIC, and PTI-backed independent candidates were asked to join the SIC. She said if a party does not have presence in the parliament then how the independent candidates can join it. She asked what the PTI-backed independents have mentioned in their forms when they were joining the SIC. Faisal argued that the PTI's Intra-Party Election (IPE) was not accepted by the ECP, Peshawar High Court (PHC) and the Supreme Court and it was deprived of election symbol. He said that the 11 judges in their judgments stated that the ECP has in fact misunderstood and wrongly applied the Supreme Court judgment that the PTI is out of February 2024 elections. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
Business Recorder
7 days ago
- Politics
- Business Recorder
Reserved seats case: SIC lawyer proposes three sets of relief
ISLAMABAD: The Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC)'s counsel proposed three sets of relief that the Constitutional Bench may grant in reserved seats case, which the majority judgment has allotted to the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI). A 11-member Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Justice Aminuddin Khan, on Tuesday, heard the review petitions of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), Pakistan Peoples' Party (PPP) and the Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP). The proceeding was live-streamed on SC's YouTube channel. Faisal Siddiqui, appearing on behalf of the SIC, argued that the court again and again has asked what kind of relief could be given in this instant case. He said there are three categories of relief. First, set aside the majority judgment and dismiss the SIC's appeal and uphold the Peshawar High Court (PHC)'s verdict. Second, the majority judgment is substituted with the judgment of any minority judgment. He said the majority judgment could be substituted with the judgment of either with the judgment of Justice Yahya Afridi or Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail. Third, the majority judgment is set aside and the appeal of the SIC is decided after rehearing. During the proceeding, Justice Jamal Khan Mandokhail inquired from the counsel whether he considers the PTI elected candidates are independents. He asked why none of the 80 candidates came forward. Justice Muhammad Ali Mazhar said if they are independent candidates then the SIC role ends in this case. Justice Musarrat inquired on which symbol Hamid Raza contested the general elections. She noted that the SIC's election symbol was 'Horse', but Hamid contested election on the symbol of 'Clock'. She further asked why Hamid Raza had not contested election on the platform of the SIC. On the question why the review petition should be dismissed, Faisal contended that a certificate which is filed by the lawyer with the petition is of critical importance; as if the grounds for review proved false then there are penal consequences of it. The SIC's counsel pleaded that the review petition could be filed by only those who were before the Court either in the original case or the appeal. He said some of the individuals who were not party in the appeal were allowed to file review petitions on the basis of the apex court's judgment in HM Saya. Justice Mandokhail questioned why a person aggrieved by the apex court's judgment could not approach the court. He said, suppose, the Supreme Court passes a judgment which infringes the right of a party/ person who was not party before the Court in the original case then why should not the court hear him. Justice Mandokhail noted that there is no mention of a party in the constitution or the Supreme Court Rules for review of any judgment or order. How come the Supreme Court, which is the final court, can pass a judgment or order without hearing a person or party, which could be affected by the judgment? Faisal argued that the court should not have allowed Hina Chugttai to file the review petition, as her party, PML-N, was before the court in the reserved seats case. He contended that if her petition was allowed then why an identical application of Kanwal Shauzaib was dismissed. 'What is not good for one is also not good for (the) other'. The bench noted that neither Kanwal Shauzaib nor her party (the PTI) filed an appeal against the order of the ECP, and Peshawar High Court. Faisal, earlier, argued that the majority judgment declared that all the candidates who had contested election as an independent are now the members of PTI in the parliament. Justice Mandokhail corrected by saying not all but only those who have mentioned in their nomination PTI, while others; i.e., 41 candidates were asked that they could join any political party. Faisal said since the Election Commission has not implemented the majority judgment; therefore, they continue to remain my members. He said that the ECP recognises the independents as the SIC members. Justice Mazhar said but after the judgment they approached the Election Commission and filed the declarations that they are members of PTI, as they themselves decide that they have joined PTI. The case was adjourned until tomorrow (May 29). Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
