Comparative perspectives on forfeiture legislation in Europe and the United States

European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 342-361

  Kilchling, Michael ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346363328     PISSN: 09289569     EISSN: 15718174     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1163/157181797X00446     Document Type: Review

References (142)

1. For further details,see M. Kilchling, 'Rechtsvergleichende Perspektiven', in M. Kilchling and G. Kaiser (eds.), Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität (Freiburg 1997) pp. 596-640.
2. All other countries are presented by a particular chapter in the above mentioned volume (see footnote 2): (1) J. Benseler, Bundesrepublik Deutschland [Germany], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 7-59;
3. M. Pieth and J. Natterer, Schweiz [Switzerland], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 61-171;
4. J. Féhérvdry, Österreich [Austria], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 173-214;
5. A. Kletzlen and T. Godefroy, Frankreich [France], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 215-248;
6. C. Fijnaut and F. Verbruggen, Belgien [Belgium], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 249-312;
7. I. van de Reyt and A. van Kalmthout, Niederlande [the Netherlands], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 313-346;
8. M. Levi, Großbritannien [Great Britain], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 347-416;
9. S. Hein and L. Paoli, Italien [Italy], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 417-518;
10. J. Udvaros, Ungarn [Hungary], loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 519-553;
11. M. Tonry, USA, loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität, pp. 555-595. Unless otherwise noted all references in this article refer to these contributions.
12. E.g., the Drug Trafficking Offences Act (DTOA) of 1994 and the Proceeds of Crime Act (PCA) of 1995; cf. M. Levi, loc. cit. Möglichkeiten der Gewinnabschöpfung zur Bekämpfung der Organisierten Kriminalität
13. Cf. T. Schea, Forfeiture Legislation in Norway (in this issue).
14. Cf. J. Benseler, loc. cit. Forfeiture Legislation in Norway, p. 36.
15. For details see W. Hassemer, Vermogen im Strafrecht, WM-Sonderbeilage No. 3/1995, p. 23.
16. M. Levi, loc. cit. WM-Sonderbeilage, p. 364.
17. Cf. S. Hein, loc. cit. WM-Sonderbeilage, p. 447;
18. A. Manna, Measures of prevention: dogmatic-exegetic aspects and prospects of reform (in this issue).
19. L. Paoli, loco cit. Measures of prevention: dogmatic-exegetic aspects and prospects of reform, p. 499.
20. T. Godefroy and A. Kletzlen, loc. cit. Measures of prevention: dogmatic-exegetic aspects and prospects of reform, pp. 222 et seq.
21. Cy A. Kletzlen and T. Godefroy, Confiscation and Anti-Money-Laundering Regulations in the French Law (in this issue);
22. for further deatils see also H. Matsopoulou, 'La confiscation spéciale dans le nouveau code pénal', Revue de Science Criminelle et de Droit Pénal Comparé́ (1995), pp. 301-317.
23. Cf. J. Udvaros, loc. cit. Revue de Science Criminelle et de Droit Pénal Comparé́, pp. 523 et seq.
24. Austin v. United States, 113 S.Ct. 2801 (1993).
25. Cf. S. Hein, loc. cit. S.Ct., p. 442.
26. Cf M. Tonry, loc. cit. S.Ct., p. 561.
27. § 20a s. 2 of the Austrian Criminal Code (StGB). Prior to the reform the limit was ATS 1 million. Forfeiture according to § 20b StGB is not subject to a minimum threshold, see M. Löschnig-Gspandl, loc. cit. S.Ct. (in this issue).
28. M. Levi, loc. cit. S.Ct., p. 363.
29. Cf T. Schea, loc. cit. S.Ct. (in this issue).
30. For further details M. Tonry, loc. cit. S.Ct.
31. Cf. J. Benseler, loc. cit. S.Ct., pp. 21 et seq., and loc. cit. (in this issue)
32. The file numbers of the proceedings are: 2 BvR 564/95 und 2 BvR 794/95; they are expected to be decided by the end of 1997 by the responsible Second Senat of the German Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassun?.sgericht) ; cf. the overview of the trials to be decided in 1997 in 34 EuGRZ (1997), pp. 130 et seq. (132).
33. § 20 s. 2 and s. 3 of the Austrian Criminal Code (StGB).
34. See § 73d of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
35. Cf. I. v. de Reyt and A. v. Kalmthout, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 326 et seq.
36. For further details, see M. Tonry, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 560 et seq.
37. The draft of the Confiscation Commission in Norway is constructed in exactly the opposite way, whereby, where doubt exists, the money is to be attributed not to the organisation or a third person but rather to the member who is the subject of the confiscation order; cf T. Schea, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB) (in this issue).
38. Article 59 No. 3 of the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB);
39. for further details M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loc.cit., pp. 128 et seq.; for further remarks see below 4.1.
40. § 20 s. 2 refers primarily to offenders from the front line, who it can be proved have committed continuing and recurrent crimes; section 3 relies (as does Art. 59 No. 3 of the Swiss StGB) on membership to criminal organization ; § 20b explicitly refers to assets of a criminal organization; cf. J. Féhérvdry, loc. cit. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 192 et seq.; for further remarks.see below 4.2.
41. 'Bescheinigungslast'; cf. J. Féhérvdry, loc. cit. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), p. 200;
42. M. Löschnig-Gspandl; loc. cit. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB) (in this issue).
43. For details S. Hein, 'Vermögensbezogene Maßnahmen im Rahmen der Bekämpfung organisierter Kriminalität, in J. Arnold et al. (eds.), Grenzübervchreitungen (Freiburg 1995) pp. 149 et seq.;
44. for a critical approach to the distinction between burden of proof and the burden of presentation see G. Illuminati, La presunzione d'innocenza dell' imputato (Bologna 1979) pp. 136 et seq.
45. § 34 No. 2 of the draft of the Confiscation Commission; this form of extended confiscation would be eligible for persons who have been found guilty for crime to be punished by 6 years ore more. Cf. T. Schea, loc. cit. La presunzione d'innocenza dell' imputato (in this issue).
46. Fine in addition to imprisonment, § 41 of the German Criminal Code (StGB);
47. cf. J. Benseler, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB) (in this issue).
48. cf. T. Godefroy and A. Kletzlen, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 220 et seq.
49. Article 42 s. 3 and 43bis of the Belgian Criminal Code (C.P.).
50. §§ 73a and 74c of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
51. Article 59 No. 2 of the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB).
52. cf. I. v. de Reyt and A. v. Kalmthout, loc. cit. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), p. 329.
53. Such a link is missing in particular in the German statutory offence relating to criminal organizations, § 129 of the German Criminal Code (StGB);
54. for further remarks on this failure see M. Kilchling, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 639 et seq.
55. Cf S. Hein, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 424, 439 et seq.;
56. § I of the Drug Trafficking Offences Act (DTOA); cf M. Levi, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), p. 370.
57. In Belgium, laundered money is defined as an object of the crime. Profits do not fall under this regulation; cf C. Fijnaut and F.Verbruggen, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 256 et seq.
58. cf. M. Tonry, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), p. 572.
59. cf. T. Schea, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB) (in this issue).
60. The decision on the request lies within the discretion of the public prosecutors; for details see M. Levi, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), pp. 370 et seq.
61. Exception: Seizure and confiscation according to Article 2ter of Law No. 575/1965 are subordinate to criminal confiscation; cf. S. Hein, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), p. 441.
62. § 43a s. 3 of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
63. Cf J. Benseler, loc. cit. (in this issue);
64. for critical comments E. Horn, SK-StGB, § 43a annotations No. 6 and 9;
65. H.-H. Jescheck and T. Weigend, Lehrbuch des Strafechts (Berlin 1996) pp. 777 et seq.
66. § 41 of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
67. cf. J. Benseler, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), (in this issue): 'zero sum game'.
68. Cf T. Godefroy and A. Kletzlen, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), p. 219.
69. Cf. J. Féhérvdry, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), p. 198.
70. With regard to Great Britain M. Levi, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), p. 375
71. with regard to France T. Godefroy and A. Kletzlen, loc. cit. German Criminal Code (StGB), p. 223.
72. BGH, 48 NJW (1995) p. 470;
73. see also J. Benseler, loc. cit.
74. BT.-Dr. 11/7663; see also J. Benseler, loc. cit. 1.
75. §§ 73 and 73d of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
76. Article 36e s. 4 of the Dutch Criminal Code (WSr).
77. 'Pluk-ze' ; cf. C. Daams and I. v. de Reyt, the 'Strip-them' Legislation in the Netherlands (in this issue).
78. In particular, the Hoge Raad ruled that costs which would not have been incurred if the criminal act had not been committed must not be included. cf. 1. v. de Reyt and A. v. Kalmthout, loc. cit. 'Strip-them' Legislation in the Netherlands, p. 327.
79. Cf J. Féhérvdry, loc. cit. 'Strip-them' Legislation in the Netherlands, pp. 196 et seq.
80. Cf. T. Schea, loc. cit. 'Strip-them' Legislation in the Netherlands, (in this issue).
81. Cf. M. Levi, loc. cit., pp. 365, 372 et seq.
82. Article 59 No. 4 of the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB);
83. cf M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loc. cit. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), p.126.
84. Article 36e s. 4 of the Dutch Criminal Code (WSr);
85. cf I. v. de Reyt and A. v. Kalmthout, loc. cit. Dutch Criminal Code (WSr), p. 327.
86. § 34 of the Norwegian General Civil Pénal Code (GCPC);
87. cf T. Schea, loc. cit. Norwegian General Civil Pénal Code (GCPC) (in this issue).
88. § 43 a s. 1.4 of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
89. § 73b of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
90. § 40 s. 3 of the German Criminal Code cf. E. Horn in SK-StGB, § 40 annotation No. 15;
91. W. Stree in Schönke/Schrbder, StGB (Munchen 1997 5), § 40 annotations 19 et seq.
92. § 244 of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).
93. In Germany in particular the asset pénalty (Vermögensstrafe) cannot be applied to third parties; otherwise it would be a punishment of third parties; A. Eser, 'Neue Wege der Gewinnabschöpfung, in F. Dencker et al. (eds.), Festschriftfiir W. Stree u. J. Wessels (Heidelberg 1993), pp. 833 et seq., 851 speaks more cautiously of 'confiscation from third parties similar to punishment'.
94. Cf. M. Tonry, loc. cit. Neue Wege der Gewinnabschöpfung, pp. 558 et seq., 572, 592.
95. Cf. M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loc. cit., pp. 113 et seq., 122 et seq.
96. Cf S. Hein, loc. cit. Neue Wege der Gewinnabschöpfung, pp. 445 et seq.
97. Cf. T. Godefroy and A. Kletzlen, loc. cit. Neue Wege der Gewinnabschöpfung, p. 218.
98. For critical remarks C. Fijnaut and F. Verbruggen, loc. cit. Neue Wege der Gewinnabschöpfung, p. 276;
99. F. Verbruggen, loc. cit., points out that Bel- gian legislation seems to have introduced a 'de facto shift in the burden of proof in respect of the innocent third party'.
100. Article 131-39 of the New Pénal Code of France (C.P.);
101. cf. T. Godefroy and A. Kletzlen, loc. cit. New Pénal Code of France (C.P.), p. 220.
102. Cf C. Fijnaut and F. Verbruggen, loc. cit., pp. 261 et seq;
103. F. Verbruggen, loc. cit. New Pénal Code of France (C.P.) (in this issue).
104. § 37a s. 3 of the draft proposed by the Confiscation Commission, cf. T. Schea, loc. cit. New Pénal Code of France (C.P.) (in this issue).
105. § 20 s. 4 of the Austrian Criminal Code (StGB).
106. § 20 s. 5 StGB.
107. Explaining these and further data L. Paoli, loc. cit. StGB (in this issue).
108. Cf. J. Féhérvdry, loc. cit. StGB, p. 211.
109. Cf. J. Féhérvdry, loc. cit. StGB
110. Cf. M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loc. cit., pp. 149 et seq.
111. Cf. J. Benseler, loc. cit. StGB, pp. 39 (table 5) and loc. cit. (in this issue).
112. §§ 43a and 73b of the German Criminal Code (StGB).
113. M. Gradowski and J. Ziegler, Geldwasche und Gewinnabschöpfung (Wiesbaden 1996).
114. See also J. Benseler, loc. cit. StGB, p. 47 (table 16).
115. § 1 11 b of the German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO).
116. For all figures see also J. Benseler, loc. cit. German Code of Criminal Procedure (StPO) (tables 17 and 18).
117. Article 36e of the Dutch Pénal Code (WSr).
118. Cf. I. v. de Reyt and A. v. Kalmthout, loc. cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr), p. 333.
119. All values taken from T. Schea, loc. cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr) (in this issue).
120. Cf. T. Godefroy and A. Kletzlen, loc. cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr), p. 224.
121. Cf M. Levi, loc. cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr), pp. 359, 364.
122. In Great Britain the enforcement of confiscation orders is clearly a problem. According to M. Levi, loc. cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr), p. 384, altogether only about a quarter of all confiscation orders are actually finally executed.
123. Cf. M. Tonry, loc. cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr), pp. 574 et seq. (table 2).
124. Cf. S. Hein, loc. cit, pp. 418 et seq., 426.
125. Judgment of 22/02/1994 (Raimondo case), Series A, Vol. 281, pp. 21 et seq.; cf S. Hein, loco cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr), p. 448.
126. Article 59 No. 3 of the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB).
127. As, e.g., in Germany; cf. A. Eser, loc. cit. Dutch Pénal Code (WSr), p. 851.
128. With regard to the connection requirement the planful action involving division of labour as a major characteristic of organized crime see, e.g., G. Kaiser, Kriminologie (Heidelberg 19963) p. 410.
129. See also M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loc. cit. Kriminologie, pp. 83 et seq.;
130. J. Féhe ́rvdry, loc. cit. Kriminologie, p. 199.
131. Article 260ter of the Swiss Criminal Code (StGB).
132. Cf. M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loc. cit. Swiss Criminal Code (StGB), p. 129.
133. Cf. D. Heckmann, Die Einziehung verdachtigen Vermogens, 28 ZRP (1995), pp. 1 et seq.
134. In the field of combatting organized crime, as distinct from the classic offender-focused prosecution, the terms 'post-preventive' or 'objective' criminal measures have recently been applied. There has even been mention of a 'fourth lane' of criminal law; P. Schick, 'Organisierte Kriminalität im Bereich der Wirtschaft, in C. Mayerhofer and J.-M. Jehle (eds.), Organi.sierte Kriminalität (Heidelberg 1996) pp. 91 et seq., 105 et.seq.
135. Cf J. Féhérvdry, loc. cit. Organi.sierte Kriminalität, p. 200;
136. M. Löschnig-Gspandl, loc. cit. Organi.sierte Kriminalität (in this issue).
137. Article 260ter of the Swiss StGB and § 27 8a of the Austrian StGB.
138. For criminological perspectives on forfeiture see G. Kaiser, 'Gewinnabschöpfung als kriminologisches Problem, in H.-H. Jescheck et al. (eds.), Festschriftfiir H. Tröndle (Berlin etc. 1989) pp. 685 et seq.
139. M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loc. cit. Festschriftfiir H. Tröndle, p. 128, even speak of a 'revolutionary' re-orientation.
140. At least according to the explanation to the Austrian legislation ; cf J. Fehervary, loc. cit. Festschriftfiir H. Tröndle, p. 198.
141. Cf M. Pieth and J. Natterer, loco cit. Festschriftfiir H. Tröndle, p. 129.
142. K.-L. Kunz, Massnahmen gegen organisierte Kriniinalitdt, Plddoyer 1/1996, pp. 32 et seq. (36).