Abstract
Examines the trend to use standalone civil forfeiture procedures as an alternative to criminal processes for removing the proceeds of crime, outlining the distinction in most legal systems between criminal and civil. Explains why civil recovery is preferred: the standard of proof is lower, requiring to be only beyond a reasonable doubt. Discusses whether these civil recovery proceedings breach the basic presumption of innocence in all rights‐based legal systems, and whether they breach the double jeopardy rule at least in spirit. Indicates the need for research into whether civil recovery is in fact effective in impacting on criminal organisations and the factors likely to influence its effectiveness.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
