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
- Introduction
- Background to NCB proceedings
- The prevalence of NCB proceedings
- Success factors of NCB proceedings
- Advantages of NCB proceedings
- Important considerations for using NCB proceedings
- The effectiveness of NCB proceedings
- Global data on the recovery of assets using NCB proceedings
- National data on the recovery of assets using NCB proceedings
- Limitations in data availability
- 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
