Vote on Confiscation of criminal assets:
- extracts from the vote
- statement by Monica Luisa MACOVEI (EPP, RO), rapporteur
Lieu: Brussels, Belgium - European Parliament
End production: 07/05/2013 First transmission: 07/05/2013
The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament has adopted a draft Report and negotiation mandate on the proposal for a Directive on the freezing and confiscation of proceeds of crime in the European Union (46 in favour, 7 against and 3 abstentions). It followed the proposals of EP Rapporteur Monica Macovei to strengthen the provisions on non-conviction-based confiscation, extended confiscation and third party confiscation.
More info at: http://www.eppgroup.eu/press-release/Freezing-and-confiscation-of-proceeds-of-crime-in-the-EU
Only the original language version is authentic and it prevails in the event of its differing from the translated versions.
||Exterior view of the EP, Brussels
||General views of the meeting room, views during the vote (9 shots)
||E- vote result: 46 in favour, 7 against and 3 abstentions
||SOUNDBITE (English) Monica Luisa MACOVEI (EPP, RO): "The main point I had to fight for was the non-conviction based confiscation and I succeeded with my colleagues by pushing a lot to have such confiscations without a criminal conviction. In specific cases, the person died and is not yet convicted or is very sick and also if the person is well and healthy but the authorities decide not to pursue a criminal way, but only to confiscate the products and the money of crimes. So, we have to have activities of a criminal nature and then you can go after the property which could be money or anything else and the person doesn't risk prison. But the interest is, in my opinion, to take the money because otherwise you put people behind bars and the money are out there developing and strengthening organised crime networks or go into illicit economies through money laundering."
||SOUNDBITE (English) Monica Luisa MACOVEI (EPP, RO): "For now, we have the UK, Ireland for instance, Bulgaria, I think also and they have such civil proceedings. They sue the property, so I don't sue you, I sue the property. I start from, here and I prove that the property comes from money from criminal activities and they are now on here on this house, this land or account. So I sue the property. But it's not necessarily to be civil proceedings, they could be in criminal courts, in administrative courts, it doesn't matter. The problem is that you want to confiscate. Follow the money - that's the principle - follow the money across the boarders because otherwise all these money stay outside, are dirty money and they create more crime."