Overview:
A new presidential directive gives Palau’s National Security Office law enforcement authority — a major shift aimed at fighting money laundering and foreign influence. But what powers will the office actually have, and how will it be monitored? Here’s what the order does — and the key questions still unanswered.
By: L.N. Reklai
KOROR, Palau (Feb. 24, 2026) — President Surangel S. Whipps Jr. has issued a directive giving the National Security Coordinator and staff the authority to act as law enforcement officers, saying the move is needed to strengthen Palau’s ability to fight money laundering, transnational crime and foreign interference.
Presidential Directive No. 26-70, dated Feb. 9, formally designates the National Security Coordinator (NSC) and employees of the Office of the National Security Coordinator as “policemen” under Title 18 of the Palau National Code. The directive also recognizes them as law enforcement officers for purposes of 17 PNC § 3334(g).
The designation will remain in effect until it is modified or revoked by the president.
The directive states that the change is necessary to improve cooperation among agencies and allow the NSC Office to legally share and receive sensitive information, especially with the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). Officials say this coordination is critical for investigating financial crimes, countering foreign malign influence and responding to national security threats.
The order cites Article VIII of the Constitution and relevant laws as the basis for presidential authority over national security matters. It also notes that the NSC Office, created under Executive Order 445, serves as Palau’s main link with foreign partners that provide intelligence, operational support and threat information.
According to the directive, the lack of formal law enforcement status has limited the NSC Office’s ability to work closely with the FIU and other enforcement agencies, particularly in anti–money laundering investigations.
Under Title 18, the law defines a “policeman” to include any person authorized by the president to act in that role. The directive uses this provision to extend law enforcement status to the NSC Office.
In practical terms, the order is intended to fully empower the office to carry out national security–related law enforcement work and remove barriers to information sharing with domestic agencies and international partners.
However, the directive also raises several unanswered questions that may be important for the public and for government agencies.
One key issue is the scope of authority. The directive does not specify what powers NSC staff may exercise under Title 18, such as whether they can make arrests, conduct searches, carry firearms or use force. It also does not outline what training, supervision or accountability measures will apply.
Another concern is how responsibilities will be divided between the NSC Office and the Bureau of Public Safety. Clear lines of authority may be needed to avoid confusion, duplication or conflicts during investigations or operations.
The directive also highlights the need for strong information safeguards. While the order emphasizes lawful information sharing with the FIU, it does not detail the protocols that will govern privacy protection, classification, evidence handling or how shared information may be used in court.
The new authority reflects growing concerns about financial crime and foreign influence in the region, but the effectiveness of the directive may depend on how its powers, limits and oversight are defined in practice.