Activities of Roberta ANGELILLI related to 2012/0036(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Freezing and confiscation of proceeds of crime (debate)
Amendments (11)
Amendment 32 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The main motive for organised crime, and particularly cross-border organised crime, is financial gain. In order to be effective, law enforcement and judicial authorities should be given the means to trace, freeze, manage and confiscate the proceeds of crime.
Amendment 36 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Although existing statistics are limited, the amounts recovered from criminal assetproceeds in the Union seem insufficient compared to the estimated proceeds of crime. Studies have shown that, although regulated by EU legislation and national laws, confiscation procedures remain underutilised and therefore require harmonisation, not least in order to ensure full and complete performance of the confiscation itself.
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) The issuance of confiscation orders generally requires a criminal conviction. In some cases, even where a criminal conviction cannot be achieved, it should still be possible to confiscate assets in order to disrupt criminal activities and ensure that profits resulting from criminal activities are not reinvested into the licit economy. Some Member States allow confiscation where there is insufficient evidence for a criminal prosecution, if a court considers on the balance of probabilities that the property is of illicit origin, and also in situations where a suspect or accused person becomes a fugitive to avoid prosecution, is unable to stand trial for other reasons or died before the end of criminal proceedings. This is referred to as non-conviction based confiscation. Provision should be made to enable non-conviction based confiscation in at least the latter, limited, circumstances in all Member States. This is in line with Article 54.1.c) of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, which provides that each State Party is to consider taking the necessary measures to allow confiscation of illicitly acquired property without a criminal conviction, including in cases in which the offender cannot be prosecuted by reason of death, flight or absence, particularly in respect of owners of property whose soundness cannot be proven.
Amendment 55 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Property frozen with a view to later confiscation should be managed adequately in order not to lose its economic value. Member States should take the necessary measures, including sale or transfer of the property, to minimise such losses. Member States should take all relevant measures, be these legislative or otherwise, such as the establishment of national centralised Asset Management Offices or equivalent mechanisms (for example where such functions are decentralised), in order to properly manage the assets frozen before confiscation and preserve their value, pending judicial determination.
Amendment 86 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to enable it to confiscate, either wholly or in part, instrumentalities, assets and proceeds following a final conviction for a criminal offence.
Amendment 90 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. Each Member State shall take the necessary measures to enable it to confiscate property theof a value of which corresponds to the proceedsequivalent to the proceeds, profits or value of the crime following a final conviction for a criminal offence.
Amendment 120 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) other property of the convicted person, which was transferred to third parties in order to avoid confiscation of property the, of a value of which corresponds to the proceedsequivalent to the proceeds, profits or value of the crime.
Amendment 125 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – introductory part
(b) the proceeds or property were transferred for free or in exchange for an percentage amount lower than their market value when the third party:
Amendment 129 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b – point i
i) in the case of proceeds, knew about their illicit origin, or, in the absence of such knowledge, a reasonable person in its position would have suspected that their origin was illicit, based on concrete facts and circumstances;
Amendment 176 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
(ka) the type of use to which the confiscated property has been put, and the contribution this has made to the social and economic development of the area and local communities concerned;
Amendment 177 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
(kb) the length of the procedures for allocating the confiscated property, especially where that property was in good condition at the time it was confiscated.