Stolen Asset Recovery: A Good Practices Guide for Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture

Contents......Page 7
Contents of the CD-ROM Appendix of Legal Resources......Page 13
Foreword......Page 17
Acknowledgments......Page 19
Abbreviations......Page 21
Introduction......Page 23
Part A Understanding the Problem and the International Response......Page 27
1. Theft of Public Assets: A Development Problem of the Greatest Magnitude......Page 29
The United Nations Convention against Corruption......Page 31
The Stolen Asset Recovery (StAR) Initiative......Page 32
Distinguishing between Criminal Forfeiture and NCB Asset Forfeiture......Page 35
NCB Asset Forfeiture in Civil and Common Law Jurisdictions......Page 38
Historical Perspective and International Support for NCB Asset Forfeiture......Page 40
Appropriate Laws to Introduce Forfeiture......Page 44
Asset Recovery......Page 46
Part B Key Concepts in Non-Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture......Page 49
1. Non-conviction based (NCB) asset forfeiture should never be a substitute for criminal prosecution......Page 51
2. The relationship between an NCB asset forfeiture case and any criminal proceedings, including a pending investigation, should be defined......Page 52
3. NCB asset forfeiture should be available when criminal prosecution is unavailable or unsuccessful......Page 53
4. Applicable evidentiary and procedural rules should be as specific as possible......Page 55
5. Assets derived from the widest range of criminal offenses should be subject to NCB asset forfeiture......Page 59
6. The broadest categories of assets should be subject to forfeiture......Page 60
7. The definition of assets subject to forfeiture should be broad enough to encompass new forms of value......Page 65
8. Tainted assets acquired prior to the enactment of an NCB asset forfeiture law should be subject to forfeiture......Page 66
9. The government should have discretion to set appropriate thresholds and policy guidelines for forfeiture......Page 69
10. The specific measures the government may employ to investigate and preserve assets pending forfeiture should be designated......Page 73
11. Preservation and investigative measures taken without notice to the asset holder should be authorized when notice could prejudice the ability of the jurisdiction to prosecute the forfeiture case......Page 76
12. There should be a mechanism to modify orders for preservation, monitoring, and production of evidence and to obtain a stay of any ruling adverse to the government pending reconsideration or appeal of any order that could place forfeitable property be......Page 77
13. The procedural and content requirements for both the government’s application and the claimant’s response should be specified......Page 79
14. Fundamental concepts such as the standard (burden) of proof and use of rebuttable presumptions should be delineated by statute......Page 80
15. Where affirmative defenses are used, defenses to forfeiture should be specified, along with the elements of those defenses and the burden of proof......Page 85
16. The government should be authorized to offer proof by circumstantial evidence and hearsay......Page 87
17. Applicable statutes of limitations (prescription) should be drafted to permit maximum enforceability of NCB asset forfeiture......Page 88
18. Those with a potential legal interest in the property subject to forfeiture are entitled to notice of the proceedings......Page 91
19. A prosecutor or government agency should be authorized to recognize secured creditors without requiring them to file a formal claim......Page 92
20. A fugitive who refuses to return to the jurisdiction to face outstanding criminal charges should not be permitted to contest NCB asset forfeiture proceedings......Page 93
21. The government should be authorized to void transfers if property has been transferred to insiders or to anyone with knowledge of the underlying illegal conduct......Page 95
22. The extent to which a claimant to forfeitable assets may use those assets for purposes of contesting the forfeiture action or for living expenses should be specified......Page 96
24. Consider permitting the parties to consent to forfeiture without a trial and authorizing the court to enter a stipulated judgment of forfeiture when the parties agree to such procedure......Page 101
25. Specify any remedies that are available to the claimant in the event the government fails to secure a judgment of forfeiture......Page 102
26. The final judgment of NCB asset forfeiture should be in writing......Page 104
27. Specify which agencies have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute forfeiture matters......Page 105
28. Consider the assignment of judges and prosecutors with special expertise or training in forfeiture to handle NCB asset forfeitures......Page 106
29. There should be a system for pre-seizure planning, maintaining, and disposing of assets in a prompt and efficient manner......Page 107
30. Establish mechanisms to ensure predictable, continued, and adequate financing for the operation of an effective forfeiture program and limit political interference in asset forfeiture activities......Page 112
31. Correct terminology should be used, particularly when international cooperation is involved......Page 117
32. Extraterritorial jurisdiction should be granted to the courts......Page 119
33. Countries should have the authority to enforce foreign provisional orders......Page 121
34. Countries should have the authority to enforce foreign forfeiture orders and should enact legislation that maximizes the enforceability of their judgments in foreign jurisdictions......Page 122
35. NCB asset forfeiture should be used to restore property to victims......Page 125
36. The government should be authorized to share assets with or return assets to cooperating jurisdictions......Page 127
Part C Special Contributions......Page 131
Forfeiture under the Criminal Code of Switzerland......Page 133
Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) for NCB Asset Forfeiture......Page 135
Asset Return Based on a Money Value Judgment......Page 136
Asset Return Based on NCB Asset Forfeiture......Page 137
Recovery of Proceeds of Corruption in the United Kingdom: Assistance of Law Enforcement and Tools for the Private Litigant......Page 141
The Assistance of U.K. Law Enforcement......Page 142
Private Civil Litigation......Page 143
Litigation Tools for the Private Litigant......Page 144
Civil Proceedings: Advantages and Disadvantages......Page 156
The United Kingdom’s Asset Recovery Strategy......Page 157
Legal Foundations......Page 158
United Kingdom Asset Recovery......Page 159
Training......Page 162
Summary......Page 163
Constitutional Relationship with the European Union (EU)......Page 165
Legal System......Page 166
Overview of Mutual Legal Assistance in the Bailiwick......Page 167
Provision of Evidence for an Investigation in a Foreign Jurisdiction......Page 168
Provision of Evidence for Prosecution in a Foreign Jurisdiction......Page 169
Sharing of Forfeited Assets......Page 170
England and Wales......Page 171
Jersey......Page 172
Hong Kong, China......Page 173
Conclusion......Page 174
NCB Asset Forfeiture Model......Page 175
Challenges to NCB Asset Forfeiture in Ireland......Page 178
The Criminal Assets Bureau......Page 180
Results......Page 184
Proposed Action......Page 185
Scope of Legal Actions......Page 186
Lessons Learned......Page 187
The Role of the Asset Management Bureau in the Anti-Money Laundering Office (AMLO)......Page 189
Management of Seized Assets......Page 192
AMLO’s Consolidated Asset Tracking System (AMCATS)......Page 193
AMLO’s Asset Forfeiture Fund......Page 194
Obstacles Experienced by AMLO Impeding Effective Asset Management......Page 196
Conclusion......Page 197
Areas for Delegation......Page 199
Drafting Administrative Procedures......Page 201
Phases of Asset Administration......Page 203
Success in Colombia’s Asset Management System......Page 208
Issues and Lessons Learned in Colombia’s Asset Management System......Page 209
Legal Basis for Asset Forfeiture Based on Illicit Enrichment......Page 211
Scope, Procedural and Evidentiary Issues, Benefits......Page 212
Mechanisms to Obtain Evidence......Page 213
Glossary......Page 215
Appendixes......Page 219
I: Matrix of Forfeiture Systems in Selected Jurisdictions......Page 220
II: Key Concepts?Quick Reference Sheet......Page 229
III: StAR Focal Point Contact List......Page 233
IV: Financial Profile Form......Page 235
V: A Sample Order to Produce Corporate and Other Documents in a Corruption Investigation......Page 257
VI: Pre-Seizure Planning Guide......Page 263
VII: Web Sites for Key Organizations, Legal Instruments, and Initiatives......Page 279