Justifying the civil recovery of criminal proceeds

Abstract

Examines the trend to use standalone civil forfeiture procedures as an alternative to criminal processes for removing the proceeds of crime, outlining the distinction in most legal systems between criminal and civil. Explains why civil recovery is preferred: the standard of proof is lower, requiring to be only beyond a reasonable doubt. Discusses whether these civil recovery proceedings breach the basic presumption of innocence in all rights‐based legal systems, and whether they breach the double jeopardy rule at least in spirit. Indicates the need for research into whether civil recovery is in fact effective in impacting on criminal organisations and the factors likely to influence its effectiveness.

Citation

Kennedy, A. (2004), "Justifying the civil recovery of criminal proceeds", Journal of Financial Crime, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 8-23. https://doi.org/10.1108/13590790510624990