<p>The aim of this research paper is to examine the legal framework for the recovery of corruptly-acquired assets, with particular emphasis on the Nigerian situation. Its primary focus is a detailed examination of the legal mechanisms for the recovery of such assets in the context of international asset recovery. Despite the success of the Nigerian government in recovering the Abacha loot,8 siphoning off of public funds by public office holders continues, and charges of fraud persist against top bank executives alleged to have converted depositors&rsquo / funds fraudulently. The prevailing criminal or conviction-based forfeiture mechanism in Nigeria appears inadequate to deal effectively with these situations. The need to enhance capacity through the adoption of civil or non-conviction based forfeiture laws therefore becomes imperative.</p>

Magister Legum - LLM / The aim of this research paper is to examine the legal framework for the recovery of corruptly-acquired assets, with particular emphasis on the Nigerian situation. Its primary focus is a detailed examination of the legal mechanisms for the recovery of such assets in the context of international asset recovery. Despite the success of the Nigerian government in recovering the Abacha loot,8 siphoning off of public funds by public office holders continues, and charges of fraud persist against top bank executives alleged to have converted depositors&rsquo; funds fraudulently. The prevailing criminal or conviction-based forfeiture mechanism in Nigeria appears inadequate to deal effectively with these situations. The need to enhance capacity through the adoption of civil or non-conviction based forfeiture laws therefore becomes imperative. / South Africa

Magister Legum - LLM / Contrary to Common perception, corruption is not all that ails Africa. It is only a component of the multifaceted economic criminality that leads to illicit capital flight from developing states and those undergoing political transition. The siphoning away of economic resources has a devastating impact on such countries, both economically and socially. This leads to an erosion of public confidence in government departments and in the administration of justice generally. The clandestine nature of economic criminality makes it particularly hard to prosecute. There has thus been an international consensus that asset recovery would be the most apt mode of deterrence and reparation. Having its genesis in the 1989 Vienna convention, asset recovery has now become a useful tool with which developing countries can recoup some of the assets plundered by criminals. The United Nations Convention against corruption has also made it possible for states to recover stolen assets by way of non--‐criminal or non--‐conviction—based procedures. The main challenge for developing states is to make international treaties part of their national law. The democratization of former dictatorial states, especially those in Africa, also means that whatever international norms are domesticated in national legislation, should be in line with the tenets of their respective democratic constitutions, thus making them legally irreproachable. This paper evaluates Zambia’s Forfeiture of proceeds of crime Act. It discusses Zambia’s asset recovery provisions against the backdrop of international benchmarks and the laws of a few other countries that also have asset recovery laws. The paper concludes with a set of recommendations.

Magister Legum - LLM / Several international instruments relating to the forfeiture of assets derived through unlawful means have been developed in the last decade. These relate to both civil and criminal forfeiture proceedings. Nevertheless, the processes of tracing the assets and having them forfeit to the State present formidable obstacles to justice authorities enforcers around the world. The fact of the matter is that the advent of the internet has made it easier for money launderers to camouflage the nature and the physical locality of their ill-got gains. This has made it all the more necessary for states and financial institutions to co-operate more closely in hitting the criminals where it hurts most – their pockets. However, the international structures that provide for mutual legal assistance procedures are drafted in broad terms or in guideline-form. Most of the books and journal articles dealing with money laundering devote scant attention to this very important aspect of combating transnational economic criminality. In most of the literature, this topic is simply avoided. This paper, which confines itself to civil recovery proceedings, strives to determine first, what international mechanisms are available for obtaining information located abroad that could be used for domestic civil forfeiture, and second, to identify some of the most intractable problems encountered by justice authorities in their attempts to attach property situated abroad. The idea is to identify the principal point of discordance, and to suggest ways in which the international instruments governing civil forfeiture could be amended so as to make them more user friendly.

Doctor Legum - LLD / The international legal framework on money laundering encourages states to put in place effective systems for the identification, freezing, seizure and forfeiture of proceeds and instrumentalities of crime. While the international legal framework obligates countries to adopt conviction-based forfeiture (criminal forfeiture), it only encourages them to consider adopting non-conviction based asset forfeiture (civil forfeiture). This has led to a situation where countries, such as Malawi, adopt only criminal forfeiture and not civil forfeiture. This study analyses the efficiency of the existing Malawian criminal forfeiture regime in curbing and preventing the proliferation of underlying profit-generating crimes and money laundering. This thesis contends, in part, that some countries have not adopted civil forfeiture because there is no international obligation to do so. It argues that the fact that states are not obligated to adopt civil forfeiture by international legal frameworks and national arrangements undermines the deterrent aim of the anti-money laundering and asset forfeiture systems in combating economic crimes. Some justify the casual approach to civil forfeiture by arguing that its implementation harbours the danger of violating human rights and constitutional guarantees. This thesis, however, advocates for the adoption of civil forfeiture within the limits of John Locke’s social contract theory, which guides states on how they can pursue policies and implement laws without limiting the rights of their people arbitrarily.

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, Bayreuth, 2006. / Includes bibliographical references (p. [213]-223) and index.

In order for the proceeds of unlawful activities to be completely dislodged from the criminals’ hands, the latter should be effectively deterred from allowing their assets to be used to execute or facilitate the commission of offences. When properly exacted, in the interests of justice and within the existing constitutional framework, the legal process known as asset forfeiture should ensure that crime never pays. Asset forfeiture refers to both criminal forfeiture, which is conviction based following the United Kingdom asset forfeiture regime and civil forfeiture, which is non-conviction based following the United States of America one.2 Chapter 5 provisions of the Prevention of Organised Crime Act3 (hereafter POCA) provides for court, Basdeo M – Search, Seizure and Asset Forfeiture in the South African Criminal Justice System: Drawing a Balance between Public Utility and Constitutional Rights (2013) LLD, University of South Africa in Chapter 5 where a comprehensive comparative study of SA POCA and United States of America’s asset forfeiture and origin is undertaken. 3 Act 121 of applications for a restraint, confiscation and realisation for the recovery of proceeds of unlawful activities. The restraint is invoked when a suspect is to be charged or has been charged or prosecuted, there are reasonable grounds to believe that a conviction may follow and that a confiscation order may be made. Chapter 6 provisions of POCA provide for court applications for preservation and forfeiture order targeting both the proceeds of unlawful activities and removal from public circulation of instruments or assets used in the commission of offences where the guilt of the wrongdoer is not relevant. POCA has a Schedule with 34 items setting out examples of offences in relation to which civil forfeiture may be invoked. When the State discharges this noble professed task in the name of public safety, security and crime combating, legal challenges arise. This is more so within a constitutional democratic context where both individual and property rights are enshrined and protected. This study deals with some of these challenges. To the mind of a legal researcher, the law of asset forfeiture is, in this process, moulded and developed. South Africa (a developing country), Canada and New Zealand (developed countries in the north and southern hemispheres) have constitutional democracies. They also have asset forfeiture regimes, which attracted the attention of the researcher. The question is: can the developing country learn some best practices from the developed countries in this particular field? It would be interesting to establish this and the level of development of this field in the three countries under study. South Africa, with no federal government, has nine Provinces, single asset forfeiture legislation5 (combining both criminal forfeiture i.e. restraint, confiscation and realisation applications and civil forfeiture i.e. preservation and forfeiture applications), and a criminal statute6 applicable to all such Provinces. It also has, like Canada and New Zealand, pockets of asset forfeiture provisions embedded in various statutes. There is only one asset forfeiture office under the umbrella of the National Prosecuting Authority.7 It has branches8 in the Provinces, invoking the provisions of POCA, since 1999. It is not part of the police department. The researcher joined the South African Port Elizabeth branch in March 2003, Bloemfontein, Kimberly and Mmabatho branches from 2010 to 2011, July 2012 onwards in the Port Elizabeth and has practical experience in this regard. The Prevention of Organised Crime Act 121 of 1998. The Namibian POCA 29 of 2004 is almost a replica of the South African POCA except that the former makes express recognition of the victims of the underlying victims. The Criminal Procedure Act, 51 of 1977 (as amended). The Asset Forfeiture Unit (AFU) with its Head Office situated in Pretoria under the umbrella of the National Prosecution Authority, which Raylene Keightley in Young S Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property Legal Measures for Targeting the Proceeds of Crime (2009) Cheltenham Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.: Northampton, MA at 94 calls a specialist implementation agency. In Pretoria, Johannesburg, Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, East London, Durban, Bloemfontein, Kimberley, Mmabatho, Mpumalanga and Limpopo. It comprises of eleven Provinces to which the Criminal Code of Canada, the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act 1996 and a host of other statutes apply. Eight of the eleven Provinces have their own and distinct primary stand-alone asset forfeiture statutes introducing civil forfeiture10 as more fully explained in Chapter 2 of this study.

Though Nixon did not coin the phrase “war on drugs” until the early 1970s, strong anti drug positions were already popular with elected officials and law enforcement. The 1973 creation of the Drug Enforcement Agency was impetus for a significant increase in drug-related incarceration, though a more significant increase of drug-related incarceration occurred in the 1980s alongside the birth of private, for-profit prisons. The end of the 20th century saw the conception of a national sentiment that drugs were the biggest security concern to the American people. The budget allocated to fight the war on drugs increased to the billions, much of which was distributed to police departments to aid them in catching drug users and/or dealers. The United States’ government’s proclamation of a war on drugs and their subsequent policy reforms occurred simultaneously to a significant increase in civil asset forfeiture--likely attributed to the heightened anti-drug sentiment

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / This study assesses the policies for managing recovered proceeds of crime in three countries, namely, Tanzania, South Africa and Nigeria. It considers the role and relevance of asset management in the asset recovery regimes of the three countries. Managing the proceeds of crime divides into two stages: the pre-confiscation stage and the post-confiscation stage. International best practices (IBPs) in asset management have been employed as a yardstick for the assessment. On the face of it, asset management is complementary to asset recovery policy. The management of preserved and recovered assets maintains their value and enables states to apply the assets to other policy objectives after the finalisation of the recovery process. From this perspective, proper asset management arguably lies at the heart of asset recovery policy. Asset recovery as a policy is concerned with the pursuit of two objectives, namely, combating crime and correcting the harm caused by crime. These objectives are encapsulated in two prominent principles: the principle that crime should not pay and the principle of corrective justice. Thus, asset management policy, as an element of asset recovery policy, needs to express these two principles and address their corresponding policy objectives. A number of challenges face the asset management institutions (AMIs) in the three designated states. They fall into two categories: policy challenges and legal challenges. The main policy challenge pertains to unbalanced or skewed policy objectives. Tanzania and Nigeria, in particular, give too much consideration to combating crime and too little to correcting the harm caused by crime to the community. These policy objectives need to be balanced by the states taking seriously the principle of corrective justice as fundamental to asset management policy. In this connection, compensation to victims, funding of institutions dealing with the victims of crime, funding of public good projects and funding of law enforcement agencies are available as ways of addressing the harm caused by the offence and showing commitment to ensuring that nobody suffers loss as a result of crime. Despite the existence and implementation of a proper asset management regime, certain factors affect the value of the preserved and recovered assets negatively. They include enforcement of certain rights in favour of the defendant, such as payment of legal, living and business expenses from the preserved assets, and certain asset recovery procedures, such as plea bargaining, non-conviction based asset recovery and administrative asset recovery. Proper legal controls are required in order to reduce the impact of such factors upon the value of preserved and recovered assets. The study concludes with a focus on the asset management regime of Tanzania. Various recommendations are offered towards the attainment of a Tanzanian regime structured in terms of balanced policy objectives. The recommendations cover three aspects: the general coverage of the law, the functioning of AMIs and the legal control of the factors that were identified as affecting the value of assets during the recovery process.

The Prevention of Organised Crime Act brought major changes to the South African criminal law context. Through the Act, major confiscatory provisions were established. The Act does not only target convicted criminals, but also any person who is in possession of tainted property that was used in the commission of offences. Civil forfeiture is the most widely used procedure in forfeiture proceedings. In the dissertation the effectiveness of criminal and civil confiscation is outlined. The historical development of confiscation and forfeiture provisions in South African is discussed with reference to the common law, legislation and international instruments and how international developments have influenced local development. This treatise consist of an overview of the confiscation provisions in the Prevention of Organised Act 121 of 1998 as one of the measures the South African legislature put in place to deal with organised crime. Since the Prevention of Organised Crime Act was passed, the courts have given meaning to what is an instrumentality of an offence and the proceeds of unlawful activities as a measure to counter organised crime. This treatise refers to those cases given the definition of an instrumentality of an offence and the proceeds of unlawful activities. For the purpose of effectively dealing with organised crime, this treatise contains a discussion on the effectiveness of criminal and civil confiscation procedure. The justification for asset forfeiture is outlined.