Dirty Assets: Experiences, reflections, and lessons learnt from a decade of legislation on criminal money laundering and terrorism financing

当代公众对有组织犯罪的形象受到媒体和/或好莱坞对有组织犯罪的表现的影响，例如，《教父》、《黑道家族》和《火线》。这一描述创造了一幅关于什么是有组织犯罪的流行图景。公众舆论自然反映了这一图景，政客/政策话语强化了这一图景，即有组织犯罪是一种等级结构，需要重要的新警察权力来有效打击它。有组织犯罪现在是犯罪辩论中政策话语的一个核心特征。同样，恐怖主义被描述为国家安全的一级威胁，十多年来，关于这一威胁和反制措施的辩论一直很突出。然而，以证据为导向的研究对有组织犯罪和恐怖主义的政策论述缺乏足够的信息。这一点在打击此类犯罪的“追随金钱”的方法上尤其明显，这些方法被假定为：作为一种威慑；扰乱犯罪网络/市场；提高破案率；并导致向警察机构提供更多的情报。然而，犯罪学研究已经证明，情况并不一定如此。此外，尽管在这一领域进行了广泛的立法(例如，2002年的《犯罪收益法》、2000年的《恐怖主义法》、2001年的《反恐怖主义、犯罪和安全法》和2010年的《冻结恐怖分子资产等法》)，但几乎没有证据表明‘追随金钱’的做法对有组织犯罪或恐怖活动产生影响。有必要对这些立法的“影响”进行评估。反洗钱/犯罪收益/反恐怖分子融资立法颁布十年后，提供了一个适当的时间来后退一步，评估“追随金钱”的方法，并确定未来政策、实践和研究的方向。“追随金钱”是打击有组织犯罪和/或恐怖主义的传统警务战略的另一种方法。这个网络将把政策制定者、从业者和研究人员聚集在一起，探索新出现的问题，包括：-我们如何衡量响应机制的成功？-反资产战略对扰乱犯罪或恐怖主义活动并减少对社会的危害有什么影响？-有可能量化扰乱有组织犯罪活动的影响吗？与更传统的“普通”犯罪相比？-在实施反资产策略时，执法机构在制度或操作形式上面临的主要困难是什么？-反资产策略对网络货币(如比特币)有何影响？-是否有其他机构或操作工具或机会可以改进反资产策略？-反资产策略的成本(特别是在货币成本和个人权利成本方面)？-在反犯罪和反恐部门之间以及从其他司法管辖区可以学到什么经验？该网络将借鉴其他司法管辖区的经验，包括美国、澳大利亚、加拿大、意大利和保加利亚。国际行动(如FATF建议；联合国《制止向恐怖主义提供资助的国际公约》)和行为者(如FATF、蒙尼瓦尔和希腊)将进一步为讨论提供信息。该网络将涉及不同的学术学科(如法律、商业、政治、社会学、犯罪学)以及来自政策和实践的关键利益攸关方。

Contemporary, public, images of organised crime are influenced by media and/ or Hollywood representations of 'organised crime' in, eg, The Godfather, The Sopranos, and The Wire. This depiction has created a popular imagery of what 'organised' crime is. Public opinion naturally reflects this picture, reinforced by politicians/ policy discourse that organised crime is a hierarchical structure requiring significant new policing powers to effectively combat it. Organised crime is now a central feature of policy discourse in the crime debate. Similarly, terrorism is depicted as a Tier 1 national security threat, and debates about the threat and counter-measures have been prominent for a decade or more.Yet, policy discourse on organised crime and terrorism is inadequately informed by evidence-led research. This is especially apparent in 'follow the money' approaches to tackling such crime, which are presumed: to operate as a deterrent; to disrupt criminal networks/ markets; to improve detection rates; and to result in increased intelligence flows to policing agencies. Yet, criminological research has proved that this is not necessarily so. Moreover, despite extensive lawmaking in this field (eg the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, the Terrorism Act 2000, the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, and the Terrorist Asset Freezing etc Act 2010), there is little evidence that 'follow the money' approaches are impacting upon organised crime or terrorist activities. There is a need for evaluation of the 'impact' of these pieces of legislation. A decade on from the enactment of the anti-money laundering/ proceeds of crime/ anti-terrorist financing legislation provides an opportune time to step back and evaluate 'follow the money' approaches, and to identify future directions in policy, practice and research.'Following the money' represents an alternative approach to conventional policing stratagems to tackling organised crime and/ or terrorism. This network will bring together policymakers, practitioners, and researchers to explore emerging issues, including: - How do we measure the success of the responsive regime?- What impacts does an anti-assets strategy have on disrupting criminal or terrorism activity and reducing harm to society?- Is it possible to quantify the impact of disrupting organised criminal activity, as compared to more conventional 'ordinary' crime?- What are the main difficulties in institutional or operational forms facing law enforcement agencies when putting into operation an anti-assets strategy?- How does the anti-asset strategy impact on online currencies (eg Bitcoin)?- Are there further institutional or operational tools or opportunities which might improve the anti-assets strategy? - What are the costs of the anti-assets strategy (especially in terms of monetary costs and cost to individual rights)?- What experiences can be learned as between anti-criminal and anti-terrorist sectors and from other jurisdictions? This network will draw upon experiences from other jurisdictions, including the United States, Australia, Canada, Italy, and Bulgaria. International action (eg FATF Recommendations; UN International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism) and actors (eg FATF; MONEYVAL; GRECO) will further inform discussion. The network will engage different academic disciplines (eg law, business, political science, sociology, criminology) as well as key stakeholders from policy and practice.