Hitting Them Where It Hurts: The history and development of Civil Recovery powers under the Proceeds of Crime Act (2002 - 2016).

直击痛处：《犯罪收益法》（2002 - 2016 年）下民事追偿权力的历史和发展。

• 批准号: AH/P00640X/1
• 负责人: Colin King
• 金额: $ 15.98万
• 依托单位: University of Sussex
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Fellowship
• 财政年份: 2017
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2017 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FP00640X%2F1
• 关键词: Hitting; Them; Where; Hurts; history

Civil recovery allows the State to confiscate assets even in the absence of criminal conviction. Thus, there are significant implications for the content and procedures of criminal law and evidence.In January 2016, the Home Affairs Select Committee launched its Inquiry into the Proceeds of Crime Act. In November 2015, the National Security Strategy emphasised the importance of targeting criminal assets, promising to: 'introduce new measures to make the UK a more hostile place for those seeking to move, hide or use the proceeds of crime and corruption or to evade sanctions.' (p.42) Following critical assessment of post-conviction confiscation orders by both the National Audit Office (2013 & 2016) and the Public Accounts Committee (2014), it is unsurprising that there is now even greater attention on 'civil recovery' provisions under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA). This research project will examine the history, policy issues, and legislative developments (ie the pre-POCA phase of research), and contrast these with post-POCA (2002-2016) developments, using documentary analysis and research interviews. These interviews will be conducted with key actors in the criminal justice system, offering new insights into the development of civil recovery, and the consequent impact on criminal law, evidence, and procedure. The issues to be explored in the research interviews have been identified, and refined, following a pilot study carried out between November 2015 and February 2016.In tackling organised crime the tactic of 'following the money' is now a central feature of government policy , gaining a particularly strong foothold in the build up to the UK Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, subsequent legislative amendments, and judicial interpretation of the legal provisions. That focus on criminal finances continues unabated today (see above). Yet, policy is all too often inadequately informed by evidence-led research on historical development, policy issues, and legislative change (including judicial interpretations). Now is an ideal time to step back and reflect upon the development of civil recovery powers, and their impact on criminal law, evidence, and procedures - from the date of enactment up to the date of the Home Affairs Select Committee Inquiry (2002 - 2016).This project will build upon the extensive work I have already conducted in this area, which has enabled me to identify key areas that require deeper examination. The specific focus of this project has been further refined in consultation with leading stakeholders, and I have established an excellent policy and practice focused Advisory Board, with representatives of:- the National Crime Agency, - the Home Office, - Eurojust, and - Royal United Services Institute (RUSI). The main outputs from this project will be:- a monograph entitled 'Civil Recovery of Criminal Assets' which is under contract with Oxford University Press;- four peer-reviewed articles in leading journals;- a series of presentations at academic and practitioner events;- Executive Summaries produced in consultation with the project Advisory Board;- an end of project, practitioner-focused, workshop;- podcasts from the project workshop; and - a conference to support emerging researchers in this field of study. These outputs will be of benefit to a wide audience, from academic, policy, and practice backgrounds.This project will build upon my previous research over the past decade. Whereas my previous research focused on a doctrinal analysis of proceeds of crime legislation, this project is driven by a new focus - combining documentary analysis and research interviews - exploring historical development, policy issues, and legislative responses (both pre-POCA and post-POCA (2002-2016)), drawing upon insights from key actors in the UK and delivering fresh perspectives on the controversial civil recovery powers.

民事追讨允许国家在没有刑事定罪的情况下没收资产。因此，这对刑法和证据的内容和程序具有重要意义。2016年1月，内政事务特别委员会启动了对《犯罪收益法》的调查。2015年11月，国家安全战略强调了打击犯罪资产的重要性，并承诺：“引入新措施，使英国成为那些寻求转移、隐藏或使用犯罪和腐败收益或逃避制裁的人更加敌对的地方。”（第42页）在国家审计署（2013年和2016年）和公共账目委员会（2014年）对定罪后没收令进行了关键评估之后，毫不奇怪，现在对2002年犯罪收益法（POCA）下的“民事追回”条款有了更大的关注。本研究项目将研究历史、政策问题和立法发展（即前poca阶段的研究），并将其与poca后（2002-2016）的发展进行对比，使用文献分析和研究访谈。这些访谈将与刑事司法系统中的主要行为者进行，为民事赔偿的发展及其对刑法、证据和程序的影响提供新的见解。在2015年11月至2016年2月期间进行的一项试点研究之后，研究访谈中要探讨的问题已经确定并完善。在打击有组织犯罪方面，“追踪资金”的策略现在是政府政策的核心特征，在英国2002年《犯罪收益法》的制定、随后的立法修正案和法律条款的司法解释中获得了特别强大的立足点。对犯罪资金的关注至今仍有增无减（见上文）。然而，对历史发展、政策问题和立法变化（包括司法解释）的循证研究往往不能充分地为政策提供信息。现在是回顾民事追索权的发展及其对刑法、证据和程序的影响的理想时机——从立法之日起至民政事务特别委员会调查之日（2002年至2016年）。这个项目将建立在我在这个领域已经开展的广泛工作的基础上，这使我能够确定需要深入研究的关键领域。在与主要利益相关者协商后，这个项目的具体重点已经进一步完善，我已经建立了一个优秀的政策和实践咨询委员会，由国家犯罪局，内政部，Eurojust和皇家联合服务研究所（RUSI）的代表组成。该项目的主要产出将是：-与牛津大学出版社签订合同的题为“刑事资产的民事追回”的专著；-在领先期刊上发表四篇经同行评审的文章；-在学术和实务活动中作一系列演讲；-与项目咨询委员会协商编写的执行摘要；-项目结束，以从业者为中心，讲习班；-项目研讨会的播客；还有一个会议，支持这一领域的新兴研究人员。这些产出将有益于来自学术、政策和实践背景的广泛受众。这个项目将以我过去十年的研究为基础。鉴于我之前的研究侧重于对犯罪立法收益的理论分析，该项目是由一个新的焦点驱动的-结合文献分析和研究访谈-探索历史发展，政策问题和立法反应（包括前poca和后poca(2002-2016)）)，借鉴英国关键行动者的见解，并提供有争议的民事恢复权力的新视角。

项目成果

Criminal Law Reform Now: Proposals & Critique

现在的刑法改革：建议

• 发表时间: 2019
• 作者: King, C

Dirty money and the new responses of the 21st century

脏钱与21世纪的新反应

• 发表时间: 2020
• 期刊: Innovation in 21st Century Legal Responses
• 作者: Benson K.

Negotiated Justice and Corporate Crime - The Legitimacy of Civil Recovery Orders and Deferred Prosecution Agreements

谈判司法与公司犯罪 - 民事追偿令和暂缓起诉协议的合法性

• DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-78562-2
• 发表时间: 2018
• 作者: King C

The Development of Transnational Policing: Past, Present and Future

跨国警务的发展：过去、现在和未来

• 作者: King, C

Corruption in Commercial Enterprise: Law, Theory and Practice

商业企业腐败：法律、理论与实践

• 发表时间: 2018
• 作者: Campbell EJ