Belust op misdaadgeld: de realiteit van voordeelsontneming
Publication date
2015
Editors
Advisors
Supervisors
DOI
Document Type
Article
Metadata
Show full item recordCollections
License
Abstract
Dutch policy makers, as elsewhere, have a strong belief in the effectiveness of asset recovery legislation. There are high expectations concerning the amounts of crime money to be collected, and the collection thereof would enable theauthorities to tackle serious, organized crime and fill the treasury. However, the results of the authors’ empirical research into the actual execution of ‘recovery orders’ show a different image. The majority of asset recovery cases concerns cases with low payment obligations (under ¼5,000), indicating that mainly ‘smaller fishes’ are targeted. In general, the collection of crime money proves to be a difficult endeavour. Large amounts are not collected and there are long execution times. Policy makers who publicly announce high expectations, and who budget the expected incomes from asset recovery, do not practice evidence-based policy making and give leeway to false hopes which then require new (legislative) measures.
Keywords
Asset recovery; confiscation; crime money; evidence based policy, Taverne, SDG 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Citation
van Duyne, P C, Kristen, F G H & de Zanger, W S 2015, 'Belust op misdaadgeld: de realiteit van voordeelsontneming', Justitiële Verkenningen, vol. 2015, no. 1, pp. 100-116.