The concept of money laundering: a quest for legal definition

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to focus on the concept of money laundering and explores the evolution and expansion of criminalization of predicate offences to the money laundering within the international anti-money laundering (AML) regime over the time. It proposes how to limit the size and scope of predicate offences in designing a balanced legal definition. Design/methodology/approach This paper opted a content analysis focussed on the criminalization aspect of offences to money laundering in the international AML regime under the United Nations Conventions (Vienna, Palermo and Corruption Convention) and Financial Action Task Force Standards. Findings This paper provides how the criminalization of money laundering has evolved and its definition expanded over the time. The international definition is widely drafted with wide range of predicate offences from proceeds of drug money to corruption, including terrorist financing and terrorist acts; however, the two phenomena – money laundering and terrorist financing are quiet distinct apart. This continual expansion of predicate offences quite leads legality issues such as over-criminalization and conflict with principles of criminal law. This paper suggests an approach to limit the size and scope of predicate offences to money laundering. Practical implications This paper includes implications for the development of a balanced approach in defining predicate offences through a qualitative limitation approach consistent with the minimalist theory of penalization of criminal law. Originality/value This paper attains an identified issue how the legal definition of the money laundering offence can be improved while considering rule of law and principles of criminal law concerns.

Reexamining the anti-money-laundering framework: a legal critique and new approach to combating money laundering

“…This article demonstrates a need to reframe the money-laundering framework, by focusing more on the actors involved, and the spaces in which money laundering occurs, rather than simply describing its process. Drug trafficking has traditionally been viewed as the archetypal predicate offence to money laundering; however, there now exist such a broad range of potential predicate activities (Korejo et al , 2021). Governments have acknowledged the money-laundering problem and acted to criminalise the offence.…”

“…However, it may be the case that governments have given too much attention to predicate crimes in criminalising money laundering. According to Korejo et al (2021), an overcriminalisation of money laundering has resulted from governments’ ill-defined approach to the money-laundering concept. Many international definitions consider money laundering to include any “proceeds of crime” focusing on income, property and illegal activities.…”

Plea bargain dilemma, financial crime and asset recovery

“…In Pakistan, the only legislation which explicitly mentions PB is the National Accountability Ordinance (NAO). NAO provides two simultaneous and antithesis approaches to tackle with financial crime and corrupt practices, first under section 10: “where a corrupt practice is punishable by up to 14 years of rigorous imprisonment with fines and confiscation of properties.” Hence, regards a corrupt act a very “serious crime – where penalty for the crime is maximum deprivation of liberty for or above four years” (Korejo et al , 2021). Second, under section 25: where the accused returns a portion of looted or laundered money and faces no imprisonment unlike section 10, and considers a corrupt act a “minor crime” and thus suggests a very placid penalty.…”

Detección y prevención del lavado de activos: perspectiva desde la auditoría forense

“…De acuerdo con Korejo et al (2021), la expresión lavado de activos se utilizó por primera vez en 1973, en el escándalo conocido como "Watergate", para referirse a los procesos en los que el dinero era transformado de "negro" a "blanco", es decir desde un origen ilegal a una apariencia legal; el término fue acuñado por la Convención de Naciones Unidas contra el crimen organizado para el proceso de transferencia de propiedad de bienes procedentes del crimen para hacer desaparecer su origen ilícito.…”