Search results

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.

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.

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.

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.

In 2008, the author wrote on the Concept of “Money Laundering Control: The Missing Link in Trinidad and Tobago. Now, approximately two years after that seminal assessment, the author has re-assessed the domestic anti-money laundering (AML) framework, with particular reference to the controls in place to address money laundering (ML) and the confiscation of the proceeds of crime. This paper aims to assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the newly implemented regime and considers whether it meets international standards.

This analysis embraces a pluralist approach. Within this assessment, a case study method is used with contextual qualitative analysis. Empirical data is analyzed and causal connections are linked to the analysis.

This research highlights catalytic change and creativity in addressing deficiencies within the AML architecture in Trinidad and Tobago. Upon analysis, it is pellucid that a radically altered criminal justice landscape has emerged and a more aggressive and targeted approach to address ML and the confiscation of the proceeds of crime is apparent. The result is a shift in paradigm with tangible outcomes to suggest that the strategies have borne fruit and that the twin island Republic is indeed committed to strengthening the link.

Findings are limited to Trinidad and Tobago and to the period ended April 2020.

As a country with a medium to high ML risk, the possible negative socio-economic effects of ML cannot be underscored. Disruption of ML and the confiscation of the proceeds of crime are, therefore, imperative. This paper considers the progress made in addressing these pertinent issues and assists in assessing the effects of the reformation efforts undertaken by Trinidad and Tobago.

The purpose of this paper is to bring to light the present civil and criminal asset forfeiture procedures within the South African context and to make suggestions for reform thereof. While there exists and is a need for constant change and reform of the law to ensure that it remains transparent, up-to-date and applicable to all means through which economic crime can be committed, South Africa lacks the necessary resources and attitudes to accomplish this essential goal.

The approach used in this paper is purely qualitative using journal articles, textbooks, reports, periodicals, speeches and legislation as its basis. It is through a consolidation of this literature that this paper was formed.

While South Africa’s present system of asset forfeiture is producing some impressive results, the process still has vast room for improvement. There are key areas which this paper outlines for reform. However, the probability of improvement is relatively low owing to the levels of corruption, illicit activities and attitudes of mistrust within the South African society at large.

The concept of asset forfeiture is not new to any international jurisdiction, let alone South Africa itself. However, this paper aims to give insight into the specific South African experience of this procedure and how it can possibly be improved within the specific context.

President Cyril Ramaphosa, in his 2018 State of the Nation Address, stated that “Thieves who are stealing public funds should be arrested and prosecuted”, and called for lifestyle audits of public-sector employees. The gross misuse of COVID-19 relief funds by public officials indicated the urgent need to execute these audits as an anti-corruption measure. This paper aims to provide a review of the existing state of affairs with regard to the application of lifestyle audits in South Africa.

This paper critically analyses the literature available on the current position of South Africa concerning lifestyle audits in the public sector, based on the mandates of some of the anti-corruption agencies that could be responsible for the conducting and processing of such audits.

South Africa has only recently seen a framework for applying lifestyle audits, developed by the Department of Public Service and Administration. Although these first steps in developing a standard practice are laudable, the practical process of dealing with misconduct and/or criminal matters remains to be seen. It is recommended that South Africa consider a legislative approach to dealing with unlawfully obtained wealth by either criminalising the act of illicit enrichment (per the United Nations Convention Against Corruption) or creating an Unexplained Wealth Order, as seen, for example, in the UK.

South Africa is in dire need of addressing corruption in the public sector. Despite lifestyle audits being called for, the lack of proper implementation is negating any positive outcomes. Therefore, alternative solutions should be investigated.