Search results

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.

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.

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.

This paper aims to determine whether tax evasion savings qualify as unlawful proceeds for money laundering purposes. Litigators, regulators and academics have debated the question for decades. A common argument is that tax evasion allows a bad actor to save money that the perpetrator already has on hand. It does not produce a new inflow of wealth that could properly be classified as proceeds. This paper addresses the validity of this argument by using a substance-based approach.

This paper applies the substance-over-form principle and two specialized judicial doctrines to the matter: the economic-substance and step-transaction doctrines.

This paper finds that in substance, tax evasion savings qualify as unlawful proceeds. The opposing argument may be valid on the surface, but it does not withstand the scrutiny of the substance-based principle and insights from the doctrines.

The finding of this paper implies that any courts which value substance can embrace tax evasion savings as unlawful proceeds. Government prosecutors can adopt the position with confidence that substance backs them up. National regulators can push the point. The United Nations’ Financial Action Task Force can consider the option to more explicitly recommend treating tax evasion savings as unlawful proceeds for money laundering.

Using a unique substance-based approach, this paper demonstrates that a dollar of tax evasion savings is substantively equivalent to a dollar of unlawful tax refund proceeds for money laundering purposes. Focusing on an unlawful tax refund overcomes many of the common concerns raised against the treatment of tax evasion savings as unlawful proceeds.

This paper aims to provide an analysis of National Accountability Ordinance 1999 (NAO) after June 2022 amendments. It raises a key question whether the new legislation is effective and improves anti-corruption operating system in Pakistan.

This paper performs an analysis of recent amendments incorporated in NAO from the observations of superior courts, United Nations Corruption Convention and Financial Action Task Force (FATF) guidelines and also evaluates new legislation in terms of effectiveness in anti-corruption campaign.

This paper finds that ample amendments are inessential, and thus may largely jeopardize accountability process; changes appear to be intentionally crafted to benefit some selected group of people: the definition of asset is compressed; the onus of proof is shifted on the informer; and provisions of money trail, foreign evidence and protection of approver are abolished; such changes defy to the UN Corruption Convention and FATF guidelines. A legislation endorsed from all stakeholders is suggested; additionally, improved strategies proposed to strengthen accountability process while keeping in view the constitutional issues relevant in the course of anti-corruption investigations.

This paper is unique in the context of the anti-corruption strategies in Pakistan, highlighting the legal laxness of new government regarding corruption and money laundering.

This paper aims to raise, and consider, first-order questions about the United Kingdom’s anti-money laundering (AML) regime.

The paper contrasts the original rationale for introducing AML and asset recovery to the UK with data on the assets recovered from organised crime and those involved in drug trafficking. It does this by analysing historical and contemporaneous literature – both official and academic.

When assessed against its original aims of combating drugs and organised crime, the tentative conclusion is that the UK’s AML system does not appear to be worth the candle.

While based upon publicly available information that is far from ideal, the analysis raises credible questions as to whether the UK’s AML regime is worthwhile and whether it could be done differently.

Raises the question of whether the impact of the AML regime could be made worthwhile by investing a great deal more in those law enforcement agencies that use the suspicious activity reporting regime. It also raises the question as to whether the AML regime could be re-purposed to achieve aims that are different from the original.

Given the financial costs, which run into billions of pounds, and the fact that the regime has failed to have a significant impact on the level of drug trafficking or the revenue of organised criminals, the paper raises questions as to when the policy can be re-designed or abandoned.

While most other analytical work simply makes suggestions as to how to improve the number of inputs into the AML system, this paper provides a critical analysis of the costs and benefits of the AML regime in the UK.

This paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of literature on policing money laundering to evaluate the quality of evidence presented in academic and grey literature. In doing so, this paper reflects upon what strategies and mechanisms work in preventing, detecting and disrupting money laundering.

To investigate the quality of evidence presented in academic and grey literature on money laundering, the authors have conducted a structured literature review of over 1,000 sources. The authors have then evaluated the quality of evidence of these sources by using three distinct methods, namely, the Maryland scale, research excellence framework and quality of empirical evidence framework.

This paper finds a large number of studies on money laundering meeting the highest academic quality standard. However, only a very small number of those studies include empirical evidence that policing measures actually work with no study able to demonstrate a correlation between money laundering measures and risk factors at any point in time.

This paper provides practical and theoretical insights into what works in money laundering and the role of scientific evaluations. It is particularly relevant for the successful implementation of anti-money laundering policy measures, including, for example, the UK’s Economic Crime Plan 2023–2026, which aspires to measure the progress and impact of policing in this area.

This study aims to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of auditor mandatory suspicious activity reporting versus the exercise of professional judgement in the anti-money laundering regimes of the UK and the USA.

The research draws upon the following sources. Firstly, statistics provided by the UK National Crime Agency, 2019 (NCA) regarding suspicious activity report (SAR) filing rates. Secondly, anti-money laundering legislation in the USA and UK. Thirdly, statements made in the political domain in the USA, particularly those which raised constitutional concerns during the progress of the Patriot Act 2001. Finally, statements and recommendations by a UK Parliamentary Commission enquiring into the effectiveness of the suspicious activity reporting regime.

The UK reporting regime does not accommodate professional judgement, resulting in the filing of SARs with limited intelligence value. This contrasts with discretionary reporting in the USA: voluntary reporting guides and influences auditor behaviour rather than mandating it. Defensive filing by UK auditors (defence to anti-money launderings [DAMLs]) has increased in recent years but the number of SARs filed has declined.

The study evaluates auditor behavioural responses to legislative regimes which mandate or alternatively accommodate discretion in the reporting suspicion of money laundering. Consideration of constitutional and judicial activism in this context is a novel contribution to the literature. For its theoretical framework the study uses Foucault’s concept of discipline of the self to evaluate auditor behaviour under both regimes.

Illicit financial flows are targeted by the United Nations’ (UN) sustainable development goals (SDGs). However, these illicit flows are not entirely understood. Furthermore, they can benefit from economic norms, laws and regulations that lack mechanisms to detect and penalize them. This paper aims to investigate whether a recent test, the embezzler test, can be used to identify regulatory architectures that facilitate illicit financial flows and related financial crimes.

This paper develops a more advanced version of the embezzler test in terms of definitions and practical implementation methodology.

In this test, the definition of embezzlement can be understood to be the occurrence of illicit financial flows crossing the boundaries of organizations and/or countries. This is a multistage test, which intentionally simulates illicit financial flows to observe how well equipped is the regulatory architecture to deal with other financial offences that are related with these flows, such as theft, money laundering, fraud, corruption, market manipulation and tax evasion.

Future research can use the version of this test to stress test a large range of economic norms, laws and regulations.

This test’s new version can assist achieve the UN SDGs’ illicit financial flow reduction target. Furthermore, it can be used to study both existing and proposed norms, laws and regulation.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first explicit test that has been presented to identify norms, laws and regulations that facilitate illicit financial flows and related financial crimes.