Advertisement

ERA Forum

, Volume 17, Issue 3, pp 323–342 | Cite as

The confiscation and recovery of criminal property: a European Union state of the art

  • Michaël Fernandez-Bertier
Article
  • 285 Downloads

Abstract

Since the late twentieth century, new criminal policies have emerged which have substantially restructured the global effort to fight crime. These anti-crime strategies eschew traditional approaches to fighting illicit behaviours in favour of a new paradigmatic shift towards the asset recovery strategy. The newly established mechanisms aim at tackling the criminals where it hurts the most, i.e. their property, with a view to ensuring that crime does not pay. This contribution succinctly analyses the birth and evolution of modern confiscation mechanisms, the prevailing models for efficient recovery of criminal property, and the European Union state of the art on the matter.

Keywords

Asset recovery Extended confiscation Non-conviction based confiscation, civil forfeiture Unexplained wealth Mutual recognition European Union 

References

  1. 1.
    Abrams, N.: Assessing the Federal Government’s ‘War on White-Collar Crime’. Temple Law Rev. 53, 984–1008 (1980) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alagna, F.: Non-conviction based confiscation: why the EU directive is a missed opportunity. Eur. J. Crim. Policy Res. 21(4), 447–461 (2015) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bartels, L.: Unexplained wealth laws in Australia. Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, No. 395 (2010) Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bell, R.E.: The confiscation, forfeiture and disruption of terrorist finances. J. Money Laund. Control 2, 105 (2003) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boles, J.R.: Criminalizing the problem of unexplained wealth: illicit enrichment offences and human rights violations. Legis. Public Policy 17, 835–880 (2014) Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hamilton, B.A.: Comparative evaluation of unexplained wealth orders. Final Report (2011). Available at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=259190
  7. 7.
    Borgers, M.J.: Confiscation of the proceeds of crime: the European Union framework. In: King, C., Walker, C. (eds.) Dirty Assets. Emerging Issues in the Regulation of Criminal and Terrorist Assets. Ashgate Publishing, Surrey (2014) Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boucht, J.: Extended confiscation and the proposed directive on freezing and confiscation of criminal proceeds in the EU: on striking a balance between efficiency, fairness and legal certainty’. Eur. J. Crime Crim. Law Crim. Justice 21, 127–162 (2013) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bullock, K., Lister, S.: Post-conviction confiscation of assets in England and Wales: rhetoric and reality. In: King, C., Walker, C. (eds.) Dirty Assets. Emerging Issues in the Regulation of Criminal and Terrorist Assets. Ashgate Publishing, Surrey (2014) Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cassella, S.: Asset Forfeiture Law in the United States, 2nd edn. Juris Publishing, New York (2013) Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cassella, S.: Civil asset recovery. The American experience. In: Rui, J.P., Sieber, U. (eds.) Non-Conviction-Based Confiscation in Europe. Possibilities and Limitations on Rules Enabling Confiscation Without a Criminal Conviction, pp. 14–15. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin (2015) Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dery, A.W.: Overview of asset forfeiture. Business Law Today, 1 (2012) Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dorn, N., Murji, K., South, N.: Traffickers. Drug Markets and Law Enforcement. Routledge, London (1992) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Feldman, D.: A survey of English forfeiture law. In: Food, S. (ed.) Illicit Drugs and Organized Crime: Issues for a Unified Europe, pp. 25–27. Office of International Criminal Justice, Chicago (1991) Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fernandez-Bertier, M.: Targeting criminal proceeds: a call for equilibrium between efficiency and respect of human rights. In: Hoc, A., Wattier, S., Willems, G. (eds.) Human Rights as a Basis for Reevaluating and Reconstructing the Law, Bruylant, Brussels (2016) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fernandez-Bertier, M.: The history of asset deprivation: from the Book of Exodus to the war on white-collar crime. In: Ligeti, K., Simonato, M. (eds.) Chasing Criminal Money in the EU: New Tools and Practices. Hart Publishing, Oxford (2016). Forthcoming Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Finkelstein, J.: The goring ox: some historical perspectives on deodands, forfeitures, wrongful death and the Western notion of sovereignty. Temple Law Q. 46, 257 (1973) Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gallant, M.: Money Laundering and the Proceeds of Crime. Economic Crime and Civil Remedies. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham (2005) Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harvey, J.: Asset recovery: substantive or symbolic. In: King, C., Walker, C. (eds.) Dirty Assets. Emerging Issues in the Regulation of Criminal and Terrorist Assets. Ashgate Publishing, Surrey (2014) Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Home Office, HM Treasury: Action plan for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist finance (2016). Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/517993/6-2118-Action_Plan_for_Anti-Money_Laundering__print_.pdf
  21. 21.
    House of Commons, European Scrutiny Committee: Twenty-second report of session 2012-13. The Stationery Office Limited, London (2012) Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    King, C., Walker, C.: Emerging issues in the regulation of criminal and terrorist assets. In: King, C., Walker, C. (eds.) Dirty Assets. Emerging Issues in the Regulation of Criminal and Terrorist Assets, p. 7. Ashgate Publishing, Surrey (2014) Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    King, C.: Civil forfeiture and article 6 of the ECHR: due process implications for England and Wales and Ireland. Leg. Stud. 34(3), 374 (2014) Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Montaldo, S.: Directive 2014/42/EU and social reuse of confiscated assets in the EU: advancing a culture of legality. New J. Eur. Crim. Law 6(2), 195–212 (2015) Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Muzila, L., Morales, M., Mathias, M., Berger, T.: On the take: criminalizing illicit enrichment to fight corruption. In: The World Bank/UNODC, Washington (2012) Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nilsson, H.G.: Where should the European go in developing its criminal policy in the future? Eucrim 1, 19 (2014) Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Panzavolta, M., Flor, R.: A necessary Evil? The Italian “non-criminal system” of asset forfeiture. In: Rui, J.P., Sieber, U. (eds.) Non-Conviction-Based Confiscation in Europe. Possibilities and Limitations on Rules Enabling Confiscation Without a Criminal Conviction. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin (2015) Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pimentel, D.: Forfeiture revisited: bringing principle to practice in federal court. Nevada Law J. 13(1), 41 (2012) Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rui, J.P., Sieber, U.: Non-conviction-based confiscation in Europe. Bringing the picture together. In: Rui, J.P., Sieber, U. (eds.) Non-Conviction-Based Confiscation in Europe. Possibilities and Limitations on Rules Enabling Confiscation Without a Criminal Conviction. Duncker & Humblot, Berlin (2015) Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rui, J.P.: Non-conviction based confiscation in the European Union—an assessment of Art. 5 of the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the freezing and confiscation of proceeds of crime in the European Union. ERA Forum 13, 354 (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Savona, E.U.: Mafia money-laundering versus Italian legislation. Eur. J. Crim. Policy Res. 1–3, 31–56 (1993) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Seals Bersinger, A.: Grossly disproportional to whose offense? Why the (mis)application of constitutional jurisprudence on proceeds forfeiture matters. Georgia Law Rev. 45, 856 (2011) Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Simon, J.: Governing Through Crime: How the War on Crime Transformed American Democracy and Created a Culture of Fear. Oxford University Press, New York (2007) Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Simonato, M.: Directive 2014/42/EU and non-conviction based confiscation: a step forward on asset recovery? New J. Eur. Crim. Law 6(2), 213–228 (2015) Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Transparency International: Empowering the UK to recover corrupt assets. Unexplained wealth orders and other new approaches to illicit enrichment and asset recovery (2016). Available at: http://www.transparency.org.uk/publications/empowering-the-uk-to-recover-corrupt-assets/
  36. 36.
    Turone, G.: Legal frameworks and investigative tools for combating organized transnational crime in the Italian experience. In: UNAFEI 134th International Training Course Visiting Experts’ papers, No. 48-64 (2007) Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    US Senate, Committee on the Judiciary: Organized crime control act of 1969—report of the committee on the judiciary United States senate together with individual and additional views to accompany S. 30. US Government Printing Office, Washington (1969) Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    US Department of Justice: BNP Paribas agrees to plead guilty and to pay $8.9 billion for illegally processing financial transactions for countries subject to US economic sanctions (2014). Available at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/bnp-paribas-agrees-plead-guilty-and-pay-89-billion-illegally-processing-financial
  39. 39.
    US Department of Justice: BNP Paribas sentenced for conspiring to violate the international emergency economic power act and the trading with the enemy act (2015). Available at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/bnp-paribas-sentenced-conspiring-violate-international-emergency-economic-powers-act-and

Copyright information

© ERA 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculté de droit et de criminologie – PJPCUniversité catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-NeuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations