The Context of the Confiscation and Recovery of Criminal Assets According to the System Requirements of a Constitutional State

Abstract

The starting point of our research is twofold. First, the specific case of criminal asset forfeiture. In this case, the prohibition of double confiscation is violated when the civil claim of `a public body` as the victim, which is not enforced in the criminal proceedings but is defined in criminal procedural law as - is only enforced after the final order of confiscation. On the other hand, we have examined to what extent the system of procedural actions for the recovery of criminal property, as defined in criminal procedural law, helps in practice to solve the problems arising from parallel proceedings. Our conclusion is that in a constitutional state - regarding the prohibition of double confiscation - the harm to the accused cannot be increased by paying twice for the damage caused by the crime. That is, partly in the form of confiscation of property and partly as a civil claim by the victim. The fundamental elements of a constitutional state - especially the due process of law, the right for just procedure - have to be guaranteed by legislation and judicature. We also examined the possibilities of tracing the proceeds of crime and other crimerelated assets from a forensic perspective.