Explaining attrition: Investigating and confiscating the profits of organized crime

Abstract

In this article, we provide insight into a common but scarcely researched problem in the process of confiscating criminal earnings: attrition, that is, the gap between estimated criminal profits on the one hand and the actually recovered amount of money on the other. We investigate the practice and results of financial investigation and asset recovery in organized crime cases in the Netherlands by using empirical data from the Dutch Organized Crime Monitor, confiscation order court files, and the Central Fine Collection Agency. The data shed light on financial investigation in practice and give a complete picture of the confiscation order court procedures as well as the execution of those orders for 102 convicted offenders – from public prosecutors’ claims and rulings of the initial, appeal and the Supreme Court, to what offenders actually pay. The phenomenon of attrition can be explained by several factors, but an important factor turns out to be how ‘criminal profit’ is defined (determined) in law and practice.

Deterrence Through Criminal Confiscation? Some Exploratory Findings From Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina

“…ten percent of cases referred to orders with a value greater than 100.000 BAM. Asymmetry in favour of low value cases has been reported elsewhere (Bullock et al, 2009;Kruisbergen et al, 2016). Annual value of recovered assets is 0.31 euro for each citizen of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or 0.007 % of national GDP.…”

“…30 Looking at the trial phase of confiscation procedure, the duration is almost double compared to national average (639 to 342 days). Compared to data from CEPEJ (2018) report 31 dealing with European justice statistics, confiscation cases in Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina take more than four times than criminal proceedings in Europe (639 to 142 days). In sum, confiscation proceedings seem to consume discernibly higher amount of time measured by duration of criminal procedure compared to average duration of criminal proceedings.…”

“…14 Attrition is the gap between estimated criminal profits and the actually recovered amount of money (Kruisbergen et al, 2016). wrongdoers from any illegally obtained benefit.…”

“…In our study the average duration of pre-trial activities before formal trial procedure was examined, while the data from judicial effectiveness index come from the cases received by prosecutors` offices, which could be dealing with crimes committed long before they were formally reported. 31 Data from CEPEJ (2018) study are "not a calculation of the average time needed to process a case but a theoretical estimate of the time needed to process pending cases" (p. 239), but provide valuable information on case duration.…”

Organising the Monies of Corporate Financial Crimes via Organisational Structures: Ostensible Legitimacy, Effective Anonymity, and Third-Party Facilitation

“…The specific issue of how the financial aspects of corporate crimes, in terms of both operational costs and profits generated, are managed remains under-theorised. This is even more apparent as law enforcement authorities in many countries have adopted a 'follow-the-money' approach in the supervision and enforcement of corporate financial crimes (Nelen 2008;Kruisbergen 2017;Kruisbergen et al 2016) alongside an increasing focus on the financial organisations (e.g., banks) and professionals (e.g., lawyers, accountants) that enable and facilitate such crimes (Middleton and Levi 2015). In this article, we seek to better understand the intersections of organisations and corporate financial crimes with particular focus on the use of otherwise legitimate organisational structures as a means of controlling illicit finances.…”