Abstract
Following ongoing reflection and experience at European level, it is possible and necessary to reason about the main features of the EU’s legal strategy in building a simplified procedure for the recognition of confiscation orders among EU countries, in order to avoid the different barriers to the effectiveness of the EU’s regime on the confiscation of proceeds of crime. It’s significant in this context to focus on the consequences of the principle of mutual recognition on the rights of individuals. The proposal for a new regulation on the mutual recognition of freezing and confiscation orders aims to amend the EU’s regime and eliminate gaps, uncertainties that legal rules still present; however, its adoption might significantly improve effectiveness of the EU’s action if the emphasis on legal solutions doesn’t come at the expense of broader questions concerning the safeguards applicable to domestic criminal proceedings which are crucial to ensuring effective cooperation between Member States in recovery action.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReference
Alagna F (2015) Non-conviction based confiscation: why the EU directive is a missed opportunity. European Journal on Criminal Policy and Research 21(4):447
Boucht J (2013) Extended confiscation and the proposed directive on freezing and confiscation of criminal proceeds in the EU: on striking a balance between efficiency, fairness and legal certainty. European Journal of Crime Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 21(2):127
Brown AN (1996) Proceeds of crime, money laundering, confiscation and forfeiture. W. Green/Sweet&Maxwell, Edimburgh
Fazekas M, Nanopoulos E (2016) The effectiveness of EU law: insights from the EU legal framework on asset confiscation. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 24(1):39
Feraldo Cabana P (2014) Improving the recovery of assets resulting from organised crime. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 22:13
Flore D (2014) Droit pénal européen: les enjeux d’une justice pénale européenne. Larcier
Kingah S (2015) Measures for asset recovery: a multiactor global fund for recovered stolen assets. World Bank Legal Review 6:457
Lelieur J (2015) Freezing and confiscating criminal assets. European Union in Criminal Law Review 5(3):279
Simonato M (2015) Directive 2014/42/EU and social reuse of confiscated assets in the EU: advancing a culture of legality. New Journal of European Criminal Law 2:195
Vermeulen G (2014) Essential texts on international and European criminal law. Maklu, Antwerp-Apeldoorn
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature
About this entry
Cite this entry
Piattoli Girard, B. (2019). Confiscation Orders and Judicial Cooperation in the EU. In: Marciano, A., Ramello, G.B. (eds) Encyclopedia of Law and Economics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_632
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7753-2_632
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-7752-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-7753-2
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences