Study of the Civil Forfeiture System According to the United Nations Convention against Corruption
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35246/jols.v34i1.130Keywords:
CorruptionAbstract
Civil Forfeiture is a controversial legal process that allows law enforcement authorities to seize assets when there is a suspicion that assets are the proceeds of crime, regardless of the accused’s conviction for crime. This process viewed on the one hand as a strong weapon for targeting criminal assets and means to commit further criminal activity, and on the other hand as a violation of the rights of individuals. Justifications have been introduced to support both sides. This Article examines those justifications, and supports the civil forfeiture system to be applied in Iraq. The Article proposes the core elements that need to be considered in adopting civil forfeiture legislation in Iraq.
Downloads
References
1. الكتب:
I. Cassella,S, Asset Forfeiture Law in the United States (2nd edn, Juris Publishing, Inc 2013).
II. Edgeworth, D, Asset Forfeiture: Practice and Procedure in State and Federal Courts (American Bar Association 2004).
III.Greenberg, T, et al., Stolen Asset Recovery: A Good Practices Guide for Non- Conviction Based Asset Forfeiture (World Bank 2009).
IV. Moffitt, A, A Quarter to Midnight: The Australian Crisis, Organised Crime and the Decline of the Institutions of State (North Ryde, NSW: Angus & Robertson 1985).
V. Williams, M,et al., Policing for Profit, The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture (The Institute for Justice 2010).
2.البحوث:
I. Brooks, B, ‘Misunderstanding Civil Forfeiture: Addressing Misconceptions About Civil Forfeiture with a Focus on the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act’ (2014) Vol. 69 )1(University of Miami Law Review.
II. Bell, R, ‘Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Assets’ (1999) Vol.63 (4) The Journal of Criminal Law.
III. Cassella, S, ‘Overview of Asset Forfeiture Law in the United States’ (2004) Vol. 17 (3) South African Journal of Criminal Justice.
IV. Cassella, S, ‘The Case for Civil Forfeiture: Why In Rem Proceedings are an Essential Tool for Recovering the Proceeds of Crime’ (2008) Vol. 11 (1) Journal of Money Laundering Control.
V. Cassella, S, ‘Why in Rem proceedings are an essential tool for recovering the proceeds of crime’ (2008) Vol.11 (1) Journal of Money Laundering Control.
VI. Cramer, J, ‘Civilizing Criminal Sanctions—A Practical Analysis of Civil Asset Forfeiture Under the West Virginia Contraband Forfeiture Act’ (2010) Vol. 122 West Virginia Law Review.
VII. Evans,J, ‘International Money Laundering: Enforcement Challenges and Opportunities’ (1996) 3 (1) Southwestern Journal of Law and Trade in the Americas.
VIII. Holcomb, J, et al., ‘Civil Asset Forfeiture Laws and Equitable Sharing Activity by the Police’ (2018) Vol.17 (1) Criminology & Public Policy.
IX. Kennedy, A, ‘Justifying the civil recovery of criminal proceeds’ (2004) Vol. 12 (1) Journal of Financial Crime.
X. Lusty, D, ‘Civil Forfeiture of proceeds of crime in Australia’ (2002) Vol. 5 (4) Journal of Money Laundering Control .
XI. Preciado M, and Wilson, B, ‘The Welfare Effects of Civil Forfeiture’ (2018) Vol. 4) 2( Review of Behavioral Economics.
3. فصل في الكتاب:
I. Keightley, R, Asset forfeiture in South Africa under the Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998 in Simon N. M. Young (ed), Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property: Legal Measures for Targeting the Proceeds of Crime (Edward Elgar Pub 2009).
II. Leong, A, Assets recovery under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002: the UK experience in Simon N. M. Young (ed), Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property: Legal Measures for Targeting the Proceeds of Crime (Edward Elgar Pub 2009).
III.McKenna, F and Egan, E, Ireland: a multi-disciplinary approach to proceeds of crime, in Simon N. M. Young (ed), Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property: Legal Measures for Targeting the Proceeds of Crime (Edward Elgar Pub 2009).
IV.McKeachie,J, and Simser,J, Civil asset forfeiture in Canada in Simon N. M. Young (ed), Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property: Legal Measures for Targeting the Proceeds of Crime (Edward Elgar Pub 2009).
V. Simser, J, Perspectives on Civil Forfeiture in Young,S, (ed), Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property: Legal Measures for Targeting the Proceeds of Crime (Edward Elgar Pub 2009).
ثانيا: الاتفاقيات:
I. The United Nations Convention against Corruption 2003.
ثالثا: القوانيين:
اولا: القوانيين الاجنبية
I. The Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000
II. 21 U.S. Code § 881 – Forfeitures
III. 18 U.S. Code § 981 - Civil forfeiture
IV. Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in UK
V. Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 in Ireland
VI. Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 in Australia
VII. The Prevention of Organised Crime 1998 in South Africa
ثانيا: القوانيين العراقية
قانون العقوبات العراقي رقم(111) لسنة 1.1969
II. قانون مكافحة غسل الاموال وتمويل الارهاب رقم (39) لسنة 2015
رابعا: التقارير:
1.التقارير الاجنبية
I.UK Cabinet Office Performance and Innovation Unit ‘Recovering the Proceeds of Crime’ (London: UK Cabinet Office, 2000).
II. Liberty submission to the Consultation on Proceeds of Crime draft clauses,(2001).
2. التقارير الوطنية
تقارير منظمة الشفافية الدولية لعام 2016, 2017I.
II.هيئة النزاهة, ملخص التقريري السنوي لعام2015
IV.هيئة النزاهة, ملخص التقريري السنوي لعام2016
V.هيئة النزاهة, ملخص التقريري السنوي لعام 2017
خامسا: قرارات المحاكم:
I. United States v. $734,578.82 in U.S. Currency, 286 F.3d 641, 657 (3d Cir. 2002).
II. In the Matter of the Director of the Assets Recovery Agency and in the Matter of Cecil Stephen Walsh, 2004 NIQB 21, High Court of Justice in Northern Ireland, 1 April 2004.
III. Connelly v Director of Public Prosecutions [1964] AC 1254, 1035
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright and Licensing:
For all articles published in Journal of Legal Sciences, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work.
Reproducing Published Material from other Publishers: It is absolutely essential that authors obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables or any extract of a text) which does not fall into the public domain, or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyrightholder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyrightholder).
Permission is required for: Your own works published by other Publishers and for which you did not retain copyright.
Substantial extracts from anyones' works or a series of works.
Use of Tables, Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks if they are unaltered or slightly modified.
Photographs for which you do not hold copyright.
Permission is not required for: Reconstruction of your own table with data already published elsewhere. Please notice that in this case you must cite the source of the data in the form of either "Data from..." or "Adapted from...".
Reasonably short quotes are considered fair use and therefore do not require permission.
Graphs, Charts, Schemes and Artworks that are completely redrawn by the authors and significantly changed beyond recognition do not require permission.
Obtaining Permission
In order to avoid unnecessary delays in the publication process, you should start obtaining permissions as early as possible. If in any doubt about the copyright, apply for permission. Journal of Legal Sciences cannot publish material from other publications without permission.
The copyright holder may give you instructions on the form of acknowledgement to be followed; otherwise follow the style: "Reproduced with permission from [author], [book/journal title]; published by [publisher], [year].' at the end of the caption of the Table, Figure or Scheme.
