Ladies and gentlemen,
It gives me great pleasure to be here this morning to address the opening
session of the Conference of the Camden Assets Recovery Inter-Agency
Network under the Irish Presidency.
I am delighted to be able to welcome so many experts in the field of asset
tracing, freezing and confiscation to this event today.
First and foremost, I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge
the invaluable work that is carried out by the asset recovery agencies
across the globe and by you, the practitioners, as experts in the field.
Traditionally our approach to tackling criminal behaviour is to bring the
perpetrators of crime to justice under our criminal law and to allow for
the imposition of criminal sanctions and penalties on those convicted of
crime.
A further key component in our law enforcement response to serious and
organised criminal activity has been the establishment of well developed
systems for the confiscation of proceeds of crime.
It is through divesting those involved in criminal conduct of their
illicit gains that we seek to disrupt and dismantle criminal enterprises,
and prevent the possible future reuse of illicit funds for criminal
purposes. In doing so we create a safer, more stable and secure
environment for our communities and allow for legitimate economic growth
free from the illicit investment of proceeds of crime.
The UN estimates that the total amount of criminal proceeds generated in
2009 may have been as much as $2.1 trillion, or 3.6 per cent of global GDP
in that year. Despite the best efforts by law enforcement agencies,
unfortunately, much of the illegal profits generated worldwide remain in
the hands of criminals, their associates, their friends and families.
To allow such a situation to go unchecked or unchallenged would be a
failing. It is entirely unacceptable to our sense of justice that those who
engage in criminality, or those who may be associated with such persons,
should reap significant rewards from criminality and enjoy lifestyles well
beyond their legitimate means.
It is incumbent on all of us to ensure that we continue to take all steps
open to us to bring about a more effective and challenging response to this
reality.
The theme of this years CARIN conference – “recognition and implementation
of alternative strategies in targeting the proceeds of crime” is
particularly pertinent given the ever developing methods for the generation
and concealment of unlawful financial gains. Asset recovery agencies work
in a very dynamic and complex environment where the effects of
globalisation, in society and in the way we communicate and do business,
are exploited to provide new opportunities for illicit gain, and to
conceal the proceeds of crime behind a façade of legitimacy.
We too must therefore stand armed with the necessary tools and knowledge to
keep pace with such developments. Of course, in such a complex and
globalised environment no one can act in isolation. We need to share the
wealth of information that you the practitioners have gained in this area
and harness that information to inform future strategies. The Network
provides a wonderful opportunity for experts to come together and do just
that.
Looking at the programme for the Conference it is clear that the Network is
engaged in very forward looking and strategic responses to the challenges
faced by practitioners. The Network has a history of bringing the
challenges faced by its members to the fore and bringing its views into the
broader policy discussions at international level. I therefore very much
look forward to seeing the conclusions from this conference emerge in due
course in future policy discussions.
The international communities have long recognised the importance of asset
forfeiture work and the need for enhanced international cooperation in this
area. This is evidenced by the significant body of international law which
either directly provides a legislative framework for the confiscation of
the proceeds of crime or which inter alia provide for confiscation measures
related to certain conduct, for example, the UN Convention Against
Corruption.
It is notable that the UNODC in a effort to further support the
implementation of the Corruption Convention and to strengthen the capacity
of the parties, established an Inter Governmental Working Group on Asset
Recovery to advise and assist the States Parties to the Convention in the
implementation of its mandate on the return of the proceeds of corruption.
The Working Group also provides a forum for discussion on the practical
aspects of asset recovery, including the challenges and good practices and
also acts as a forum for discussions on capacity-building and technical
assistance.
With regard to international developments, I note that your Agenda also
includes an item concerning work that is underway at European level to
provide for an enhanced EU legislative framework in this area - the
proposal for a new Directive on the freezing and confiscation of proceeds
of crime in the European Union. As many of you will be aware, this proposal
seeks to further harmonise European rules particularly with regard to
criminal confiscation measures.
While it was hoped that significant progress on this dossier might be made
during the Irish Presidency that unfortunately has not proved possible.
Although, I was heartened to learn that just last week the European
Parliament finally settled its position on the instrument and that
negotiations with the Parliament are expected to commence shortly.
Such a proposal is to be strongly welcomed as a further step in the
strengthening of the response at European level. Ireland is strongly of the
view that if we wish to create a truly hostile environment for those in
possession of illicit gains, it is essential that we keep under continuous
review our legislative frameworks so as to ensure their proper development
and effectiveness. While the scope of this harmonising measure is
restricted to confiscation measures that are criminal in nature, we are
hopeful that we will also see further developments in the future with
regard to the development of mutual recognition instruments dealing with
both civil and criminal orders.
Recognising, that those associated with criminality, in particular serious
and organised crime, have shown the ability to distance themselves from the
commission of offences and yet maintain lifestyles supported by the
proceeds of such activity, a number of jurisdictions have incorporated
remedies such as non-conviction based civil forfeiture regimes into their
legal systems. Such a remedy has increasingly become a feature of the
asset forfeiture landscape internationally and amongst some Member States
of the European Union.
Of course, with diversity in approaches we also present ourselves with the
challenge at international level of developing international cooperation
based on such diversity. The plain fact is that legal regimes differ and
this brings diversity in terms of procedural rules, evidential rules and
legal safeguards. Such diversity in approaches can sometimes give rise to
lack of understanding or even the misconception that fundamental rights may
in some way be circumvented or diminished in the less familiar regimes.
However, it is clearly the case that civil forfeiture regimes can, and do,
operate within legal frameworks which can provide the necessary powers
together with the requisite fundamental safeguards to ensure systems that
are fair and just and which meet fundamental rights standards.
I am hopeful that through the international fora, including this Network,
we can build sufficient knowledge and familiarity with these systems to
support enhanced cooperation in the future.
I recall the tragic events out of which Ireland’s civil forfeiture regime
was born – the killing of a member of An Garda Síochána and an Irish
journalist. The horror of those events and the public outrage that
followed demanded that the State take action against those who profiteer
from organised crime.
As participants in CARIN, you will no doubt have a familiarity with the
work of the Criminal Assets Bureau.
The remit of the Bureau is
to confiscate, freeze or seize the proceeds of
crime, ensure that criminal proceeds are subjected to tax, and to determine
the eligibility of claims for State benefit or assistance by criminals or
suspected criminals.
It has long been acknowledged that one of the key strengths of the Bureau
is its multi-agency structure. In addition other notable operational
developments have been the establishment of a Bureau Analysis Unit and the
ongoing training and recruitment programme for asset profilers who are
located throughout the jurisdiction and who provide an asset profiling
service to the Bureau.
The introduction of a civil forfeiture regime and the establishment of the
multi-agency Bureau - were all very novel concepts in this jurisdiction.
However, the success of the Bureau and the public support it enjoys are a
testament to the commitment of the agencies involved under the stewardship
of the Chief Bureau Officer and to the fact that citizens want to know that
those who seek to live on the spoils of organised criminality will be held
to account.
To conclude, I would like to thank and congratulate everyone involved in
the organisation of this event. I know the staff of the Criminal Assets
Bureau, with the support of Europol and the funding provided by the
European Commission, will ensure that this event is as productive as
possible.
Finally, I would like to wish you, the participants, well and I hope that
we will see the fruits of your work in the future development of more
effective action against the proceeds of crime at national and
international level.