The prime objectives of the FATF are: to set standards and promote effective implementation of legal, regulatory and operational measures for combating money laundering, terrorist financing and other related threats to the integrity of the international financial system. Hence, the FATF is a policy-making body which works to generate the necessary political will to bring about national legislative and regulatory reforms in these areas. Once an oddity, FATF now holds a reputation of global governance in a landscape characterized by the glaring features of contested multilateralism, plurilateralism, regime complexes, and good enough global governance. And for the last three decades, the most influential international organizations have integrated FATF’s standards as their own. The G22 body of The Asia Pacific Economic Forum leaders in 2009 identified FATF as a keystone institution in a promised new global financial regulatory architecture. While soliciting the lawfare argument with regard to the FATF, we may argue that the application of international law can also be horizontal in the sense that two or more than two countries may enter into a treaty with one another. Similarly, a group of countries may agree on a set of laws to govern their common objectives. Such laws are horizontal in the sense that they apply between those countries as opposed to the deriving from a supranational organization such as the UN. Since the objectives of regional organizations and inter-governmental organizations can be merged with the broader objectives of supranational organizations. The result is a web of international laws that are both horizontal and vertical regarding the application. Though the FATF 40+9 Recommendations do not enjoy the same status as international law instruments with regard to the UN conventions and the UN Security Council resolutions, and are therefore legally unbinding, yet there are organic linkages in the themes and underlying policies of the UN instruments and the FATF 40+9 Recommendations. Generally, a globalized financial system allows money, whether licit or illicit, to move around increasingly freely. Those seeking to regulate it, however, are bound by traditional conceptualizations of sovereignty and held back by the legal boundaries of their jurisdictions. The reach of existing governance institutions does not match the scale of the problems that each nation faces. The Economic pragmatists are of the view that the costs and benefits of FATF and AML, must, accordingly, be measured against the costs of the illicit activity it targets. The international fight against money laundering, then, is a microcosm of the fundamental challenge of global governance today, particularly as it pertains to illicit markets. Technically, Pakistan needs about 15-16 votes- amongst 36 members of the FATF forum- to move out of the greylist and a minimum of three votes to avoid falling into the blacklist. The FATF currently has 36 members with voting powers and two regional organizations – EU and GCC In recent years, the AML regime has come to encompass the standardisation of the activities of certain professions that are presumed to be particularly relevant to financial flows. The AML standards adopted by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), the pre-eminent global standard-setting body on the matter, require states to apply to the legal profession certain rules of conduct that have long been applicable in the financial industry. This requirement specifically covers sole or firm-based legal practitioners, excluding in-house counsel in organisations or legal personnel working for government institutions. By all means, Pakistan remains an honourable member of the global law community. It unconditionally believes to honour the norms established by international law. Pakistan belongs to the constructivist school of international law believing that nations must comply with international law in order to follow norms and behave appropriately. Notably, the FATF has put Pakistan’s name on a money laundering grey list early in 2018 thereby giving it time to take action against further downgrade. Being on the grey list means that accessing funds from international markets would become tougher for Islamabad. Yet, Pakistan has raised its warranted concerns against the politicisation of the United Nations’ counter-terrorism machinery, saying such a course would only compromise the integrity of the system. “It is important that current structures like FATF (Financial Action Task Force) and the UN resolution 1267 Sanctions regimes are not used as political tools by some to advance their geopolitical goals,” Ambassador Dr Maleeha Lodhi told the UN Security Council. Pakistan has diplomatically started to launch its efforts amid fears of being blacklisted by the global anti-terror watchdog Financial Action Task Force (FATF) at its next plenary and working group meet in Orlando on June 16-21. In its recently held May meeting in China. Islamabad has forcefully represented its case regarding the objective measures that Islamabad has taken with regard to its commitments. In June 2018, Pakistan principally agreed to tighten its compliance with anti-money laundering laws and counter-terror funding after being placed on the FATF greylist. In September 2018, the SECP issued Guidelines on Implementation of AML/CFT Framework under the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (Anti Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism) Regulations, 2018 [“Guidelines”] designed to assist RPs in complying with the Regulations. It clarifies and explains the general requirements of the legislation to help RPs in applying AML/CFT measures, developing an effective AML/CFT risk assessment and compliance framework suitable to their business, and in detecting and reporting suspicious activities. Because of the limited progress on action plan items due in January 2019, the FATF urged Pakistan to swiftly complete its action plan, particularly those with timelines of May 2019. Currently, during the Asia Pacific-Joint Group face-to-face meeting in Guangzhou, China, on May 15-16, Pakistan has presented its case resourcefully and presented all the actions that it had taken in compliance with FATF’s regulations. Based on this the APG group will prepare a report which will be presented at the Plenary and Working Group meeting at Orlando, Florida. “Pakistan has taken enough steps with regard to money laundering and Combating Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) in compliance with the FATA requirements to be removed from the grey list,” an official said. Technically, Pakistan needs about 15-16 votes- amongst 36 members of the FATF forum- to move out of the grey list and a minimum of three votes to avoid falling into the blacklist. The FATF currently has 36 members with voting powers and two regional organizations – EU and GCC. Truly speaking, the core mission or the underlying objectivity of FATF to examine the economic accountability of nations should not be hibernated by the notorious power play of geopolitics. In this backdrop, the rationalists’ view- beyond the sceptics’ desire to stay Pakistan name on the greylist – holds that the FATF executive board in its June meeting to be held in Orlando (US), by judiciously and impartially reviewing Pakistan’s case, should remove Pakistan from its grey list, keeping in view the reformative and progressive steps that Islamabad is gradually taking in this regard. The writer is an independent ‘IR’ researcher and international law analyst based in Pakistan