Search results

In recent years an emerging global trend of introducing legislation to use civil procedures against criminal assets can be detected. However, these civil forfeiture models, which exist vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. This paper seeks to identify issues which need to be considered when such a scheme is being designed and examines the options which have been adopted.

The paper examines the legislative provisions in a number of jurisdictions setting out the common issues which have arisen and the range of options which have attempted as potential solutions.

The paper concludes that jurisdictions which seek to introduce civil forfeiture legislations now have various examples from which to learn but that these models will likely evolve in the face of litigation and experience as legislatures and policymakers attempt to produce fair but effective procedures for the civil recovery of criminal proceeds.

As further jurisdictions respond to this emerging trend and draft their own legislation, there is much to be leant from the issues which others have considered necessary to address and the way in which these issues have been dealt with.

In 1993, Austria embarked on comprehensive legislation to combat money laundering. The principal areas of legislation on the prohibition and the prevention of money laundering are:

The purpose of this study is to explore spatiotemporal factors that affect the empirical analysis of whether crime rates in buffer areas surrounding abandoned properties transferred to a Land Bank that differed among three regimes: before transfer, during Land Bank stewardship and after disposition and whether those differences were associated with differences in relative crime activity in the neighborhoods in which they were located.

This study analyzed crime incidents occurring between 2010 and 2018 in 0.1-mile buffer areas surrounding 31 abandoned properties sold by the Land Bank and their neighborhoods in which those properties were located. Using Copulas, researchers compared concordance/discordance in the buffer areas across the three regime states for each property and approximately matched time periods for associated neighborhoods.

In a substantial number of cases, the relative crime activity levels for buffer areas surrounding individual sold properties as measured by the Copulas shifted from concordant to discordant states and vice versa. Similarly, relative crime activity levels for neighborhoods shifted from concordant to discordant states across three matched regimes. In some cases, the property and neighborhood states matched, while in other cases they diverged. These cross-level interactions indicate that criminal behavioral patterns and target selection change over time and relative criminal activity. The introduction of Copulas can improve the reliability of such models over time and when and where they should be customized to add more granular insights needed by law enforcement agencies.

The introduction of Copulas can improve the spatiotemporal reliability of the analysis of criminal activity over space and time.

Spatiotemporal considerations should be incorporated in setting interventions to manage criminal activity.

This study provides support for policies supporting renovation of abandoned properties.

To the best of authors’ knowledge, this research is the first application of Copulas to crime impact studies. As noted, Copulas can help reduce the risk of applying intervention or enforcement programs that are no longer reliable or lack the precision provided by insights into convergent/divergent patterns of criminal activity.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the way in which the courts in the UK have interpreted the meaning of criminal property in the principal money laundering offenses under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA).

This paper employs a doctrinal legal analysis and secondary data, which analyze the primary source, which is POCA itself, and secondary sources including case law, articles in academic journals, books and online databases.

The authors contend that the courts in the UK have been dynamically interpreting the ambit of money laundering offenses in POCA and that despite such judicial activism in the construction of criminal property, it has provided a much needed certainty to the law.

This paper could be a useful source of information for the practitioners, academicians, policymakers and students in this particular area of crime.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the Vietnamese laws and practices concerning the confiscation of proceeds of crime, especially in view of Vietnam’s obligations to meet the international standards on money laundering and terrorist financing, set by the Financial Action Task Force and relevant international conventions that Vietnam ratified. To limit the scope of this paper, the analysis focuses on the confiscation of proceeds of domestic crimes that do not require international legal assistance. This paper concludes with recommendations for improving the legal framework on criminal asset recovery in Vietnam.

This is a doctrinal study that considers the applicable legal framework. This study is supported by brief case studies of major cases involving the confiscation of proceeds of crime.

Vietnam has a functioning asset confiscation regime but gaps in the law, lack of financial investigation expertise and lack of focused investigative attention on asset preservation and confiscation are hampering its effectiveness. The key gaps can easily be closed with appropriate amendments to the law. These reforms should be combined with a dedicated skills development program to produce sufficient number of financial investigation experts and criminal asset management experts to support the regime. The training should extend to judicial officers to ensure an appropriate understanding of the asset confiscation law. Reforms such as these should follow on a comprehensive review of Vietnam’s law and practices relating to the confiscation and forfeiture of criminal assets. This review should extend to assets linked to the financing of terrorism and proliferation to ensure that Vietnam has a comprehensive regime to deal with criminal assets.

This paper draws on publicly available information regarding the confiscation of proceeds of crime in Vietnam. Little data is available on asset confiscation and that prevents an in-depth assessment of the regime.

This paper highlights gaps in the current asset confiscation regime and proposes reforms and approaches that will ensure a more effective asset confiscation regime for Vietnam.

‘It is incorrect to view the recovery of the profits of unlawful activity as a part of the criminal justice process and, as such, justifiable only on the basis of a prior finding of guilt according to the criminal standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt.’

The language in respect of the money laundering offence of concealing or disguising criminal property is drawn from various international conventions. It is therefore surprising, given the number of jurisdictions, which have incorporated that language into their domestic legislation, that more foreign case law is not used to interpret and properly apply these offences. The purpose of this paper is to rectify that position.

This paper uses case law from the USA, where there are frequent money laundering prosecutions, to throw light on the underlying concepts of the concealing or disguising offence and to provide examples of activity which may amount to its commission.

The offence of concealing or disguising criminal property is drafted in broad terms. Many of the issues, which have been explored in the US jurisprudence are likely also to arise in criminal proceedings in the UK.

The paper examines a number of issues, which have not yet been explored by the UK courts. It looks at the approach of the US courts to the differentiation between the mere spending of criminal proceeds and the spending, which is the doing of an act for the purpose of concealing proceeds. It looks at whether concealment must be intended by the defendant's actions or whether it is sufficient if it is an outcome of his actions. It considers how effective any concealment must be and explores the different attributes of criminal proceeds, which may be concealed.

Money laundering is a complex issue which has been ongoing for many years globally. Developed and developing countries form anti-money laundering regime in the view to combat these ever-challenging criminal activities. Laundering of money involves the hiding and cleaning of “dirty money” derived from unlawful activities. Malaysia has come up with its own regime of anti-money laundering. Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 (AMLATFA) provides power to forfeit proceeds at the end of proceedings. This paper aims to investigate whether the current civil forfeiture regime in Malaysia is effective in fighting against money laundering.

This paper will be based on a doctrinal research where reliance will mainly be on relevant case laws and legislations. AMLATFA is the primary legislation which will be utilised for the purpose of analysis.

Despite the enactment of AMLATFA, little study has been carried out on the effectiveness of civil forfeiture regime under Malaysian anti-money laundering laws. Furthering into forfeiture of criminal proceeds, the findings show that forfeiture provisions are the recent law enforcement strategy to fight against crimes. It is implicit that this strategy is more efficient than the conventional approach, which only focused on punishing the individual criminal but failed to diminish the criminal operations as a whole.

Strengths and weaknesses of AMLATFA are identified where it is less comprehensive in terms of offences covered and standard of proof. With that, this paper analyses the civil forfeiture regime under the Malaysian anti-money laundering laws. This paper would also offer some guiding principles for academics, banks, their legal advisers, practitioners and policymakers, not only in Malaysia but also elsewhere. Anti-money laundering laws can further be improved by being a better and established civil forfeiture regime where Malaysia will be able to discharge its duties well on forfeiting benefits from criminals.

The rise of cryptocurrencies and other digital assets has triggered concerns about regulation and security. Governments and regulatory bodies are challenged to create frameworks that protect consumers, combat money laundering and address risks linked to digital assets. Conventional approaches to confiscation and anti-money laundering are deemed insufficient in this evolving landscape. The absence of a central authority and the use of encryption hinder the identification of asset owners and the tracking of illicit activities. Moreover, the international and cross-border nature of digital assets complicates matters, demanding global coordination. The purpose of this study is to highlight that the effective combat of money laundering, legislative action, innovative investigative techniques and public–private partnerships are crucial.

The focal point of this paper is Australia’s approach to law enforcement in the realm of digital assets. It underscores the pivotal role of robust confiscation mechanisms in disrupting criminal networks operating through digital means. The paper firmly asserts that staying ahead of the curve and maintaining an agile stance is paramount. Criminals are quick to embrace emerging technologies, necessitating proactive measures from policymakers and law enforcement agencies.

It is argued that an agile and comprehensive approach is vital in countering money laundering, as criminals adapt to new technologies. Policymakers and law enforcement agencies must remain proactively ahead of these developments to efficiently identify, trace and seize digital assets involved in illicit activities, thereby safeguarding the integrity of the global financial system.

This paper provides a distinctive perspective by examining Australia’s legal anti-money laundering and counterterrorism financing framework, along with its law enforcement strategies within the realm of the digital asset landscape. While there is a plethora of literature on both asset confiscation and digital assets, there is a noticeable absence of exploration into their interplay, especially within the Australian context.

A successful prosecution for a criminal offence requires a prosecuting authority to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant possessed the requisite mens rea, or mental state, and that at that time he also committed the actus reus of the offence, that is to say those elements of the crime apart from the mental element. One of the most common features of the actus reus of money‐laundering offences across different legal jurisdictions is that the prosecution usually has to prove, inter alia, that the property which was the subject of the transaction was, as a matter of fact, the proceeds of crime. Some variations will however occur, in that in certain jurisdictions there may be a requirement to prove that the property is the proceeds of a particular predicate offence; in others it may be sufficient to prove that the property is derived from any form of criminal conduct. This paper examines the ways in which law enforcement authorities have attempted to prove this clement of a laundering offence, and concludes by making some suggestions for alleviating the difficulties inherent in doing so. Given that there have been relatively few convictions for money laundering in the UK, many of the examples are drawn from other jurisdictions, some of which have much greater experience of such prosecutions. Occasional examples are also drawn from civil forfeiture cases. While the standard of proof in such cases is that applicable in civil proceedings rather than the criminal standard applicable in money‐laundering prosecutions, such cases may nevertheless be useful so as to see the type of evidence adduced before the courts in order to prove that property is the proceeds of crime.