The effectiveness of non-conviction-based proceedings in asset recovery

This Anti-Corruption Helpdesk brief was produced in response to a query from a U4 Partner Agency. The U4 Helpdesk is operated by Transparency International in collaboration with the U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre based at the Chr. Michelsen Institute.

Query

Non-conviction based confiscation and non-conviction based forfeiture are frequently cited as a solution in anti-corruption and asset recovery debates. To what extent is there evidence of their success?

Contents

1. Introduction
   1. Background to NCB proceedings
   2. The prevalence of NCB proceedings
2. Success factors of NCB proceedings
   1. Advantages of NCB proceedings
   2. Important considerations for using NCB proceedings
3. The effectiveness of NCB proceedings
   1. Global data on the recovery of assets using NCB proceedings
   2. National data on the recovery of assets using NCB proceedings
   3. Limitations in data availability
4. References

Main Points

— Non-conviction based (NCB) proceedings are perceived by practitioners as a useful complement to criminal law approaches to corruption, particularly in situations where criminal law cannot adequately respond.

— NCB proceedings should not be seen as separate to criminal proceedings but as a part of a joined-up approach.

— Available data further suggests that NCB proceedings tend to recover proportionally more assets than criminal proceedings and lead to a higher proportion of frozen assets being ultimately confiscated.

— Additional data sources and more granularity in that data would help to gain a deeper understanding of the success levels of NCB proceedings

Authors

Jackson Oldfield [email protected]

Reviewed by

Rosa Loureiro-Revilla (U4)

Jamie Bergin, Gillian Dell (TI)

Date

09/02/2024

Tags