MUTUAL RECOGNITION OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS AND CONFISCATION 15

YEARS AFTER TAMPERESYRACUSE

22-23 SEPTEMBER 2014

Is the current legal framework sufficient?

Dave FennellMutual Assistance and Extradition DivisionDepartment of Justice & EqualityIreland

Question: Is the current legal framework

sufficient?

Answer: Probably not. A lot has been achieved

but more can be done

What can be done?

• The Irish approach to targeting proceeds of crime

• Our experience of mutual assistance

• Where do we go from here?

Targeting proceeds of crime in Ireland

• Criminal Assets Bureau

• Proceeds of Crime Act 1996

Proceeds of Crime Act

• Non-conviction• Independent of criminal proceedings• Targets property• Civil law procedures• Interim order exparte• After 21 days, a new application• Onus of proof shifts• After 7 years, the property is forfeit

CAB objectives

• Identify assets suspected to derive directly or indirectly from criminal activity

• Take action to deprive or to deny persons of the assets

• Pursue investigations arising from above objectives

Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB)

• Multi-agency– Police (37)– Revenue/Customs (12)– Department of Social Protection (DSP) (5)– Department of Justice (16)• Anonymity for Revenue/DSP/Justice officers

– Own legal support– Specific criminal offences of

obstructing/assaulting CAB officers

CAB results (1996-2012)

• €100m – proceeds of crime

• €150m – taxes collected

• €3m – social security savings

Positives

• Creates deterrent• Undermines Organised Crime Groups

activities• Creates visibility on the ground• Engenders confidence in the system• Encourages public support

Negatives

• Assets migrate• Criminals become more sophisticated• Organised Crime still operational

So that’s our domestic process. What’s happening with mutual

assistance?

Mutual assistance

• In 2013, the Irish Central Authority dealt with 584 requests for assistance and transmitted 200 requests.

• Of the 784 requests, how many involved freezing/confiscation?

5.

Why only 5?

• Ireland does not transmit requests.

• But how do we explain the small number of requests received?

So what needs to be done?

• More legislation?

More legislation?• Conventions• Directive 2014/42/UE• Council FDs– 2001/500/JHA– 2003/577/JHA– 2005/212/JHA– 2006/873/JHA– 2006/960/JHA– 2007/845/JHA– 2008/977/JHA

What’s the problem with non conviction based approach?

–Critics say that police should chase criminals, not money. Chase both. –Not compatible with some

national/constitutional systems. –So, if we cannot expand non conviction

based measures, what can we do?

Can we expand mutual recognition of existing civil orders?

• To what extent should executing MS be able to look behind order from the issuing MS?

• Given that the issuing MS is bound by CFR/ECHR, is there a need to look behind order?

• To what extend could other EU instruments (procedural rights) offer some comfort?

• Could MR be restricted to very serious offences?

Challenges to Irish legislation

• Right to fair trial• Reversal on the onus of proof• Right against self incrimination• Restricts right of access to the courts• Breaches rights to private property

The foundation of justice is good faith

- Marcus Tullius Cicero