Author(s): Mălina Tebieş / Language(s): Romanian
Issue: 10/2022
The recovery of assets resulting from the commission of crimes is an integral activity of the criminal process, which is to enjoy the same attention as the administration of evidence that proves the guilt or innocence of individuals. Considering the importance of identifying the proceeds of crime in order to effectively combat organized crime, as well as the importance of a rapid exchange of information between Member States that can lead to the identification and confiscation of proceeds of crime, the Council of the European Union adopted Decision 2007/845/JAI of 6 December 2007 on the cooperation between the debt recovery offices of the Member States in the field of tracking and identifying the proceeds of crime or other assets related to crime. With the objective of recovering the proceeds of crime in the fight against corruption, organized crime, money laundering and other economic crimes, parallel financial investigations carried out to identify, seize and confiscate the proceeds of crime should be an integral part of any strategy to combat serious crime and of organized crime". Although some courts have assessed that the measure of confiscation is not mandatory for the courts, since they can assess from case to case the appropriateness of taking it in relation to the circumstances of the act, the degree of its concrete social danger and the social dangerousness of the perpetrator, the solution must be assessed as illegal, remaining, moreover, isolated in the context of judicial practice. The Ministry of Justice initiated, starting in 2011, the consultation process with the main objective of developing a new National Anti-Corruption Strategy. We note that extremely high scores were given, being considered imperatively necessary, measures that bring to the fore data transparency, correct information, digitization, the establishment of unique databases at the European level, increasing the integrity of the human resource involved in public procedures and of citizens in general. "Specialization of prosecutors and judges in specific fields such as public procurement, European funds, construction authorization and urban planning etc." received a grade of 4.29. In our opinion, this measure, which takes into account the specialization of magistrates in specific fields, is imperatively necessary. Along with specialization, not only the quantitative coefficient of judicial decisions delivered with speed would increase, but also the quality of the judicial act.
More...
