Not Guilty: Do Non-Conviction-Based Confiscations Go Too Far?

What is it about?

Criminal activity hinders EU Internal Market growth by reducing trust between citizens, and illicit profits infiltrate the legal economy. This phenomenon has led the EU to enact a directive regulating illegal asset freezing and confiscation. In addition, it has issued a regulation that facilitates cross-border freezing and confiscation orders. However, traditional freezing and confiscation measures do not provide sufficient results, leading to the implementation of more effective measures. Non- conviction-based confiscation is the most viable alternative, in which assets of people who are not criminally convicted are confiscated if they cannot prove legitimacy. Taking such measures to combat criminality may violate a person’s human rights. Therefore, this paper will explore the dynamics of non-conviction-based confiscation and human rights violations.

Featured Image

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

Photo by Tingey Injury Law Firm on Unsplash

Why is it important?

This article delves into the European Union's initiatives to tackle criminality, highlighting the complex challenge of balancing the rights of victims with those of criminals. While ensuring justice for victims remains a priority, safeguarding the rights of accused individuals is equally essential to uphold democratic principles. The issue is further complicated by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which often provides ambiguous guidance on enacting laws that address these competing interests effectively. This lack of clarity leaves member states grappling with legal uncertainties, underscoring the need for a more cohesive and pragmatic approach to justice within the EU framework.