International Legal Cooperation, Confiscation/Repatriation of Assets, and Virtual World



Through international cooperation, States ought to fight crime and curtail the enjoyment of property illegally acquired through criminal activity on the Internet, particularly with respect to the use on the black market or tax havens. International legal Cooperation is a prerequisite to any prevention of online crimes due to its inherent international reach. This chapter provides an analysis of ways to improve international legal cooperation.


International legal cooperation Freezing Confiscation Repatriation Improvements 


  1. 1.
    Weaver, S. J. (2005). Modern day money laundering: Does the solution exist in Na expansive system of monitoring and record keeping regulations. Annual Review of Banking & Financial Law, 24, 443–465.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Henriques, D. B. (2009, June 30). Madoff, apologizing is given 150 years. New York Times, A1.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    The United States Department of Justice, Asset Forfeiture Program, Annual Financial Statements, FY 2011 Report no. 12-12. Retrieved 25 May, 2018, from
  4. 4.
    McCaw, C. E. (2011). Asset forfeiture as a form of punishment: A case for integrating asset forfeiture into criminal sentencing. American Journal of Criminal Law, 38, 181.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    European Commission. (2012). Confiscation and asset recovery: Better tools to fight crime. States new service, Brussels. Retrieved May 26, 2018., from
  6. 6.
    Baldwin, F. Art theft perfecting the art of money laundering (Jan. 2009 for the 7th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Arts & Humanities). An unpublished work, sent to the U.S. Library of Congress on 04/20/2012 by University of Florida College of Law Professor Emeritus Levin, by request of the author (pp. 47–48).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Carli, C. V. (2011). Lavagem de dinheiro: prevenção e controle penal. Porto Alegre: Verbo Jurídico.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Toffoli, J. A., & Cestari, V. C. J. (2009). Mecanismos de Cooperação Jurídica Internacional no Brasil. Manual de Cooperação Jurídica Internacional e Recuperação de Ativos – Matéria Civil (2nd ed.). Brasília: Asset Recovery and the International Legal Cooperation Council Department, National Secretariat of Justice, Ministry of Justice.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    United States v. Opportunity Fund and Tiger Eye Investments, Ltd. United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:08-mc-0087-JDB). Decided 07/16/2012. Retrieved June 14, 2018, from$file/09-5065-1255619.pdf
  10. 10.
    King, K. F. (2011). Personal jurisdiction, internet commerce, and privacy: The pervasive legal consequences of modern geolocation technologies. Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology, 21, 61–124.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Keen, R. (2011). Untangling the web: Exploring internet regulation schemes in western in western democracies. San Diego International Law Journal, 13, 351–381.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hoffmahn, C. D. (1998). Encrypted digital cash transfers: Why traditional money laundering controls may fail without uniform cryptography regulations. Fordham International Law Journal, 21, 799–860.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mostyn, M. M. (2000). The need for regulation anonymous remailers. International Review of Law Computers & Technology, 14(1), 79–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hunt, J. (2011). The new frontier of money laundering: How terrorist organizations use cyberlaundering to fund their activities, and how governments are trying to stop them. Information & Communications Technology Law, 20(2), 133–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    French, J. A., & Zahralddin, R. X. (1996). The difficulty of enforcing laws in the extraterritorial internet. Nexus, 1, 99–127.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Land, M. B. (2009). Protecting rights online. The Yale Journal of International Law, 34(1), 1–46.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Eccles, R. (2015). Online sales and competition law controls. International Journal of Franchising Law, 13(3), 3–10.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gardella, T. M. (2006). Beyond terrorism: The potential chilling effect on the internet of broad law enforcement legislation. St. John’s Law Review, 80, 655–692.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.3rd RegionFederal Court of AppealsSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations