More legal possibilities for the confiscation of criminal assets

Minister of Justice and Security Ferdinand Grapperhaus will expand the legal possibilities for the confiscation of criminal assets. He is working on a legislative proposal providing for the confiscation of criminal funds and property obtained from crime without a prior conviction for a criminal offence. It is irrelevant in whose name the object is registered or that the owner is unknown. For confiscation by the government, all that matters is that the Public Prosecution Service can demonstrate to the court that the object has been derived from crime.

In a letter submitted to the House of Representatives this week, Minister Grapperhaus announced a legislative proposal for the non-conviction based confiscation (NCBC) procedure.

'We will tackle criminals where it hurts them: their assets. By that, we mean not only their drug money, but also their luxury cars and expensive watches. If the police raid a property in search of illegal weapons and also discover half a million euros in cash, no lengthy criminal proceedings will be required in order to confiscate the money if the parties involved in a case allege that it does not belong to them. Ploys involving concealed ownership structures, in which criminals register vehicles and property in the name of third parties, are also pointless.'

according to Grapperhaus.

The confiscation of criminal assets is a crucial aspect of tackling subversive, organised crime. Not only will criminals be thwarted in their pursuit of swift financial gains, it will also contribute to the prevention of criminal investments in further illegal practices. Moreover, criminals and those who assist in facilitating their illegal practices will be prevented from corrupting the legal economy with their criminal funds and consequently undermining society.

Elaboration of legislative proposal

A legislative proposal for the NCBC procedure is currently being drafted. Under the current ‘squeeze 'em legislation’ (confiscation of proceeds of crime), criminal assets cannot be confiscated without a prior conviction for a criminal offence. This will be possible under the NCBC procedure and will therefore enable swifter intervention in withdrawing objects derived from crime from the market. In confiscation cases, at present, the investigative services concerned and the Public Prosecution Service devote a lot of manpower and time firstly to criminal proceedings against a suspect, particularly in cases where they also need to call in international legal assistance to work with other countries and where concealed ownership structures are used. The strength of the new method lies in reversing the current operating procedure: confiscation centres on the object, rather than the individual.

In view of breaching an individual’s right of ownership, confiscation is only possible after a final judgment. To that end, the government is required to demonstrate that the object is linked to criminal offences. If there are any individuals who can lay claim to the confiscated object, they are expected to be able to declare that it originates from a legal source. The necessary legal safeguards will also be incorporated, such as the right to legal representation and the possibility to appeal against the court judgment. This also includes the possibility to claim compensation if confiscation is deemed unlawful.

The endeavour is to have a legislative proposal for the NCBC procedure available for consultation in spring next year.