Search results

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the unexplained wealth inside the corporation and to initiate and apply unexplained wealth order in the Indonesian corporation based on the Indonesian legal system and prevailing laws. An effective tool needs to be implemented because of the facts that numerous corporate illegal activities lead to economic and financial crime. Meanwhile, there are difficulties to implement the corporate criminal liability. Non-conviction-based asset forfeiture will be a way out to deal with the current condition.

This paper explores and analyzes the Indonesian legal system, particularly a non-conviction-based asset forfeiture for corporate illegal activities. This paper is based on the research paper conducted with the legal normative approach.

Non-conviction-based asset forfeiture through unexplained wealth order will be an effective tool and a revolutionary pattern in the crime prevention perspective dealing with corporate crime. Corporate criminal liability in anti-corruption regime can be viewed from two perspectives by combining and integrating crime prevention approach as well as the repressive approach. The Indonesian Supreme Court Regulation number 13 of 2016 is a breakthrough in the criminal justice system to redesign case handling procedure toward corporate crime. It needs to be supported by precise asset forfeiture law. Furthermore it is necessity to strengthening and built corporations with moral and ethical business values.

This paper can be a source to explore the unexplained wealth that can occur in the corporation and the way to overcome it through unexplained wealth order and non-conviction-based asset forfeiture.

This paper contributes by initiating a non-conviction-based asset forfeiture, which is implementing the in rem proceeding, to make sure the crime does not pay and the victim and society suffer less because of the corporate crime.

The purpose of the paper is to trace the historical foundations of forfeiture from antiquity to its migration into early criminal law statutes. From there the discussion turns to gaps in the law that gained recognition with the emergence of globalized economies and the development of technologies that allowed illicit wealth to be moved transnationally with ease and stealth. The balance of the paper will give an overview of the countermeasures taken in response to these gaps. The paper concludes with comment on the recent spread of non-conviction-based asset forfeiture laws and the practical use to which these laws can be put in relation to the tracing, seizing and forfeiture of illicitly acquired wealth.

The paper opted for a historical legal review of the development of forfeiture laws in common law jurisdictions.

The paper traces the development of the origins of forfeiture in the common law. It lays out the original compensatory objectives of forfeiture and its eventual migration into the criminal law. The paper describes how non-conviction-based asset forfeiture has evolved in modern times as a response to gaps in the criminal law that have been exposed by the pernicious aspects of globalized economies and the ease with which electronic intangible assets can be moved and beneficial ownership obscured.

This paper provides an overview of the origins of forfeiture law and traces the use and adaptation of that law as an emerging and effective response to transnational money laundering.

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.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the applicability and challenges of using asset forfeiture mechanisms in taking away the illicit gains of Somali piracy for ransoms.

The paper presents a desk research on the issue. It is based on analysis of the key principles in the area and relevant literature on the subject.

Asset forfeiture mechanisms can be used to facilitate the seizure of Somali piracy proceeds. It is applicable to those who directly or indirectly benefited from piracy: the foot soldiers, financiers and other beneficiaries. This would enable withdrawal of piracy re-investment capital and hence may act as a disincentive for current and prospective offenders.

For the initiative to work, various states and other actors need to cooperate. However, incentives such as corruption, the personal interests of individuals and states that have benefited from Somali piracy, may make them unwilling to collaborate. This would definitely hinder the implementation and effectiveness of using asset forfeiture.

Much of the literature on Somali piracy for ransoms has focussed on maritime solutions. Further, authors and organisations have advocated for following the money trail. As a result, consideration of the benefits and challenges of doing so needs to be done. This paper seeks to fill this gap.

This paper aims to focus on the use of unexplained wealth orders (UWOs) in South Africa as a civil method to act upon lifestyle audit results that have indicated wealth from unknown, possibly unlawful, sources.

This paper applied a comparative methodology. Legislation and the application of UWOs in Ireland, the UK and Australia were compared with the situation in South Africa.

It is proposed that South Africa includes UWO legislation within its Prevention of Organised Crime Act or be established as a separate piece of legislation. Also, South Africa should follow both the civil and criminal route to target the proceeds of crime.

Corruption in South Africa is rampant and, without the necessary legislation, impossible to fight. For these purposes, this paper proposes measures to be used from a civil forfeiture perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the broad concept of forfeiture, its legal positions in the UK and Malaysia, and to highlight the implications of such forfeiture systems and legislations.

This paper uses a doctrinal legal analysis and secondary data, which analyses primary sources, the POCA (2002) and the AMLATFA 2001, and secondary sources including case law, articles in academic journals, books and online databases.

The authors contend that the civil forfeiture system and law have far-reaching implications, affecting not only law enforcement agencies, but also on property owners, the courts and bona fide third parties. Also, civil forfeiture law as contained in AMLATFA 2001 represents one of the most serious encroachments on private property rights. Not only that, such a legal rule has made property, and not the owner, guilty until proven innocent.

This paper could be a useful source of information for practitioners, academicians and students. It could also be a beneficial guide for policymakers for any possible future amendments to the law.

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.

The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the congruence between Nigeria’s unremitting rule of law deficit, corruption pandemic and its crisis of developmentalism. The paper proves that market failures and state failures are mutually reinforcing and are functions of systemic official corruption in the private and public sectors of the Nigerian economy.

This study is library-based. It relies on secondary data generated by the variegated multilateral agencies, law reports of international and municipal tribunals, relevant books, journals, monographs policy papers and so forth as the basis of analysis.

Findings suggest that Nigeria’s corruption pandemic is a derivative of its unremitting rule of law deficit and that its crisis of developmentalism is a logical function of the pervasive normlessness, very wide latitude for discretion, arbitrariness, weak institutions and lack of centrality of law and its institutions, which characterise its body politik.

Systemic corruption in Nigeria affects the citizens’ perception of social justice and equity and undermines economic efficiency. It has also distorted the work reward causality, which has engendered a rentier social-economic order.

By first demonstrating the congruence between Nigeria’s rule of law deficit, corruption and economic and governance failure; the paper focusses on the total breakdown of norms in the Nigerian private and public sectors and resultant stultification of economic growth, sustainable human development and pervasive impoverishment of the citizenry.