Search results

In this paper, the author intends to showcase the effectiveness of the Rwandan legal regime governing criminal asset recovery. This paper aims to advocate for a need to enforce laws, which seems to be dormant, and to ensure fairness of action when confiscating or seizing assets that initially belongs to bonafide third parties.

The author assesses the effectiveness of law No. 42/2014 of 27/01/2015 governing the recovery of offence-related assets in Rwanda and compares it with established international standards provided in major conventions to which Rwanda is a party. Primary and secondary sources of legal research have been used. Primary sources include international conventions, domestic laws and case laws. Secondary sources include books, chapters, journal articles and policy papers.

In this paper, the author submits that the law on crime-related asset recovery suffers from strategic deficiencies and gaps and posits that the process of asset recovery should be streamlined and balanced to meet the aims of crime prevention.

This research paper is a first of its kind. Through positive criticism, it showcases that Rwanda is doing well through the establishment of relevant laws to combat crime. However, it proposes solutions to identify gaps. This paper is original and has never been published anywhere else, and all sources used have duly been recognized.

This study aims to first analyze the inhibiting factors for cross-border asset recovery and, second, analyze the solutions to any barriers to cross-border asset recovery.

This study was normative legal research with legal materials collected by document studies and literature studies. This study used a statute approach and a conceptual approach

First, the inhibiting factors for cross-border asset recovery are regulation-related issues, lack of mutual legal assistance and extradition treaties, differences in legal systems and the interests of the country, where the assets are placed. Second, the solutions to the barriers to cross-border asset recovery are regulatory reforms and diplomacy strengthening.

This study found some barriers and solutions to cross-border asset recovery. These can provide inspirations for subsequent studies to be reviewed in more depth.

This study will be very useful for the Indonesian Government to formulate effective and efficient policies related to cross-border asset recovery.

With effective and efficient policies related to cross-border asset recovery, it can prevent criminals from hiding their criminal assets abroad.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, until now, there has been no study that comprehensively discloses the barriers and solutions related to the failure of the Indonesian Government to conduct cross-border asset recovery. Therefore, it is expected that this study will be very useful for the Indonesian Government and other researchers to conduct further studies on this issue.

This study aims to understand the member countries’ current asset recovery mechanism based on two elements, namely, confiscation policy and asset recovery management framework.

Content analysis was performed on the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) Mutual Evaluation Report (MER) of eight countries.

The result showed that only a few countries established a centralised asset recovery centre or special task force to manage recovered assets.

This study is limited to information mentioned in the FATF MER.

This study highlights the need to have a centralised asset recovery management centre as an initiative to improve the outcome of money laundering investigations. The study findings will benefit regulators to understand further the practical challenges of the asset recovery mechanism for future improvement.

FATF recommends that each country establish a centralised asset recovery centre and work closely with the investigating officers and prosecutors in deciding on assets confiscation. However, the implementation is contingent on their local environment and resources at the member countries’ discretion. Therefore, this study aimed to understand the member countries’ current asset recovery mechanism based on two elements, namely confiscation policy and asset recovery management framework.

Recognising that financially related, personal information is the raw material of successful asset recovery investigations, the paper aims to examine the mechanisms which investigators may use to gather such information and the legal barriers to information gathering.

The paper draws on the author's own practical experience of involvement in criminal asset recovery proceedings in the UK.

It is the State's obligation to deliver criminal asset recovery in the most efficient and cost‐effective way, consistent with privacy rights and obligations, providing value for money in what is delivered by law enforcement. Doing so will require making better use of financial information held by public sector agencies. There must be no form of financial information which is beyond the reach of an investigator in an appropriate case. If there is, criminals will utilize that weakness to place criminal assets where information in respect of those assets cannot be obtained. If asset recovery is to be successful, it is essential that – to use the metaphor of financial information as “dots” – investigators are able to collect the dots, connect the dots and share the dots.

The paper identifies: the need to keep the legal tools used to obtain information under regular review; eight core information skills which investigators must develop for effective asset recovery; and the importance of a multi‐disciplinary approach in analysing financial information.

The paper explores UK criminal asset recovery from an informational perspective.

The aim of this study is to investigate how Nigeria can seek legal assistance on recovery of its stolen assets to reduce corruption and to ensure no sheltered havens for incomes from corruption.

The research adopts a conceptual method by using existing literature with the application of doctrinal legal research technique. The research likewise uses primary and secondary sources of legislations such as legislative provisions, case laws and the provisions of Chapter V of the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the process of asset recovery. The study compares the United Kingdom, USA, Hong Kong in China, South Africa and Nigeria proceeds of corruption recovery laws to gain basic legal features that would be beneficial to Nigeria in reforming its anti-corruption laws.

The principle of territorial sovereignty under the international law makes the offence of corruption not punishable outside the jurisdiction of the state where the offence was committed. As a result, some developed states boost their economy with these proceeds and the developing states are impoverished. There is also an allegation of discrepancies in the figures of funds recovered by the anti-corruption agencies. Thus, there is the need for transparency; law on civil forfeiture of proceeds of corruption; bilateral treaties; and mutual legal assistance on investigation, confiscation among countries for tracing and returning of proceeds of corruption.

The estimates of the volume of assets looted from Nigeria vary widely because of the complexity of collecting data on proceeds of corruption as official statistics on proceeds of corruption recovered do not exist as each anti-corruption agency occasionally makes pronouncements on the volume of assets recovered without any breakdown in terms of assets seized, nature of assets and their locations and its values. Such data would aid policymakers to measure the effectiveness of the present assets legislations and to enhance its effectiveness.

Considering the clandestine manners corruption is being committed, it is tasking to correctly evaluate the amount of money stolen so, their economic impacts on the nation’s economy.

Absence of accurate data would aid policymakers to measure the effectiveness of the present assets legislations and to enhance its effectiveness.

The study offers modules on management of proceeds of corruption by establishing “Assets Management Commission” and “Proceeds of Corruption Forfeiture Funds” for reparation of victims’ of corruption. The study suggests the necessity for civil forfeiture of proceeds of corruption, which is presently lacking, and creation of Proceeds of Corruption Recovery and Management Commission to manage such proceeds and advocate establishment of “Proceeds of Corruption Forfeiture Funds” for reparation of victims of corruption.

The purpose of this paper is to examine what use has been made of civil recovery legislation in the first three years of its existence and to explain the legal issues which have been raised before the courts so far. It also examines the legislative and non‐legislative changes to the civil recovery scheme since it is commencement in 2003.

The paper uses examples from amongst those cases initiated by the Assets Recovery Agency and draws on both reported and unreported court rulings.

The civil recovery cases brought against property by the Assets Recovery Agency may be classified into six categories: where a potential criminal defendant has died and is therefore beyond prosecution; where a criminal defendant has been acquitted; where a criminal defendant was convicted but the confiscation hearing failed; where the respondent is not within the jurisdiction; where the owner of the property is uncertain; and where a respondent is unprosecutable due to insufficient evidence.

The paper provides a useful framework for law enforcement agencies which are considering what type of cases they may useful refer for possible civil proceedings by the Agency. The paper also sets out for practitioners a useful summary of the civil recovery jurisprudence which has so far developed.

Targeting criminal assets plays a key role in tackling crime, yet there is a notable absence of research on the operation and impact of this approach. This article calls for greater engagement between policymakers, practitioners and researchers to address this. Using experiences from Scotland, the article focuses on the use of civil recovery and identifies a number of areas that are in need of further research. This paper aims to discuss these issues.

This article is a collaborative effort by a member of the Scottish Civil Recovery Unit and an academic researcher. The aim was to stimulate debate on the use of civil recovery, its impact, and future research directions. It draws upon two case studies from Scotland to illustrate how civil recovery has operated in practice.

There are important distinctions between the civil recovery regime in Scotland and the regime that applies in other parts of the UK (e.g. the absence of “incentivisation”). There is a need to consider how the impact of civil recovery can be measured, and there is scope for future research in this area.

There is a notable absence of empirical research on civil recovery. The hope is that this article will lead to greater engagement between policymakers, practitioners and researchers. There is a need for empirical research on areas such as has civil recovery disrupted criminal activities, what intelligence gains does asset recovery bring, does asset recovery offer value for money, how is “impact” to be measured, etc.

As civil recovery increases in popularity as a form of crime control, this article calls for greater empirical research on the operation and impact of the civil process to tackling criminal assets. This is especially important today as the European Union is investigating the possibility of a European model of non-conviction based asset recovery.

Discussion of civil recovery under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 tends to focus on England and Wales. This article considers civil recovery from a Scottish perspective.

This paper aims to critically analyse the existing framework on assets tracing and recovery in Nigeria. It will thereafter provide analysis of the asset and recovery measures of advanced countries such as the USA and the UK. The results from the analysis will yield maximum insight and help the Nigerian Government to make better policies and laws on assets tracing and recovery.

This paper will rely on primary and secondary data drawn from the public domain. It will also rely on documentary research.

This paper determined that the Nigeria asset recovery scheme is likely to be more effective if Nigeria adopts the approach of the UK and the USA.

This paper will suggest new ways for assets tracing and recovery. The suggested approaches/methods are being used in advanced countries such as the UK and the USA.

Previous research papers have extensively discussed the problems faced with assets tracing and recovery from a prohibitive and investigative standpoint. This paper will discuss the topic from a preventive standpoint with little focus on investigative mechanisms.

Recent developments in the EU’s anti-corruption strategy have brought the EU closer to meeting the UNCAC’s objectives, i.e. the Proposal for a Directive on combating corruption (2023) and the Proposal for a Directive on Asset Recovery and Confiscation (2022). This paper aims to discuss these developments from the perspective of the UNCAC, to identify missing elements in the EU’s asset recovery mechanisms.

Critical approach towards EU anti-corruption policy (discussing the problems and solutions). Review of EU developments in asset recovery law.

There is a political will on the part of the EU to fight corruption through the rules enshrined in the UNCAC. However, improving EU law by introducing a new type of confiscation of unexplained wealth and criminalising illicit enrichment, without establishing convergent rules for the return of corrupt assets from EU territory to the countries of origin, cannot be seen as sufficient action to achieve the UNCAC’s objectives. In modelling mechanisms of the return of assets, the EU should search for solutions to overcome the difficulties resulting from the ordre public clause remaining a significant factor conditioning mutual legal assistance.

This paper discusses the possible input of the EU, as a non-State Party to the UNCAC, to advance implementing the UNCAC solutions on asset recovery by establishing convergent rules for the return of corrupt assets from EU territory to countries of origin.

International asset recovery proceedings may be hindered by several obstacles, especially in the case of “failed states” or of states that experience a regime change. In this context, Switzerland, a country with extensive experience in asset recovery, attempted two legislative leaps forward, the first in 2011 and the second in 2016. The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the legislative innovations in Switzerland, with special reference to their strengths, weakness and compatibility with human rights standards.

This paper draws on legal scholarship, jurisprudence, reports and other open source data, to analyze two important legislative innovations in Switzerland [Law on the Restitution of Assets of Criminal Origin of 2010 (LRAI) and law on assets of illicit origin (LVP).

The two Swiss legislative initiatives that will be examined (LRAI and LVP) are innovative in nature, but serious weaknesses and obstacles to asset recovery remain unaddressed. Despite their flaws, these two legislative innovations can inspire positive change in international and national norms. They can be viewed as part of a work-in-progress for the reinforcement of asset recovery proceedings and international cooperation in this domain.

Since the new law on asset recovery (LVP) came into force (July 1, 2016), this has been the first study examining the strengths and weaknesses of the adopted text, its compatibility with human rights standards and its potential influence on international standards of asset recovery.