Resolving a screening alert
A screening alert moves from open to a resolved outcome only through a controlled decision. In Ustawi that decision is restricted to the MLRO (Money Laundering Reporting Officer) role, because dismissing a hit — or escalating it toward an STR — is a compliance judgement, not a clerical one.
The open → resolved path
- 1Alert raisedScreening flags a possible match against a sanctions or PEP list and opens an alert, timestamped and attributed.
- 2MLRO reviewThe MLRO examines the hit against the client's captured identity data to judge whether it is a true match or a false positive.
- 3ResolveThe MLRO records the outcome — dismissed as a false positive, or resolved with a decision to escalate toward an STR case.
Why resolution is restricted to the MLRO
Clearing or escalating a hit is exactly the kind of action that must sit with a designated, accountable person. Concentrating it on the MLRO role keeps the decision with the officer the institution has appointed for it, and keeps casual dismissals out of the hands of staff who originate loans. This is enforced by the platform's role-based access, not by policy alone.
The audit trail
Every alert action — who reviewed it, what they decided, and when — is written to the audit log. That gives the tenant, and its supervisor on request, a complete record of how each hit was handled, which is what makes a dismissal defensible rather than invisible.
A dismissed alert is resolved with a recorded reason and stays in the history. It is never erased, so the decision can always be reviewed later.