The Criminal Assets Bureau (Cab) has expressed the urgent need for laws to evolve in accordance with the modern age, where high-profile criminals are frequently moving overseas and beyond the reach of Irish legal orders. Despite the introduction of proposed laws aimed at amplifying the power of Cab to detect and confiscate criminal assets, justice officials emphasise the necessity for greater international participation.
The bureau was founded in 1996, following the assassination of crime reporter Veronica Guerin, with the goal of imposing added strain on criminals beyond traditional legal prosecution. Since its establishment, the Cab has reclaimed approximately €210 million worth of assets from culprits. Currently, the Cab has assigned goals in all counties and is set to train 50 new asset-profilers next week.
The Oireachtas Justice Committee, attending to pending legal amendments under pre-legislative review on Tuesday, was informed that the operational conditions have dramatically changed since the original Proceeds of Crime Act was enacted. Kevin McMeel, The Cab’s legal representative, highlighted the increasing globalisation of crime since the 1990s.
According to him, high-level criminals often relocate overseas which poses a significant challenge in enforcing Irish laws as other jurisdictions tend not to recognise them, especially in the field of cryptocurrencies. Therefore, it is crucial for the Criminal Assets Bureau to adapt with the changing times.
Brendan Bruen, a criminal legislation official with the Department of Justice emphasised that international cooperation is “absolutely essential”. The recent acceptance of the Asset Recovery Confiscation Directive by the EU, a prototype for the confiscation of unaccounted wealth influenced by Irish laws, is set to reshape attitudes regarding international cooperation and law enforcement. He suggested that all European nations will now follow a model similar to the Cab model.
The committee received information that since the inception of Cab’s authorities, criminals have adjusted their methods. They no longer invest in visible, grand properties susceptible to identification and seizure. This shift has significantly reduced the initial substantial value of asset confiscations. Mr McMeel suggested that these changes have pushed criminals to relocate overseas, highlighting the degree to which Cab had been successful in disrupting their routines.
Committee members were informed that whenever settlements are reached with the targets by Cab, they happen under the mutual understanding that there will be no claims for legal costs and an anticipated absence of ensuing publicity. They were advised that this had become a generally recognised facet of the legal enforcement environment.
The proposed sections in the Proceeds of Crime (Amendment) Bill 2024 would empower the Cab to immediately nominate a receiver in instances of asset seizures. As per the existing law, once the High Court validates that an asset is crime-related, it might take at least seven years for its confiscation and sale. The proposed Bill intends to shorten this timeframe to a span of two years.
A distinct amendment is suggested to preclude efforts to re-question whether assets have been bought with the proceeds of crime. The amendment also seeks to offer a judicial extension to the duration the District Court can hold a seized property. This would permit more time for comprehensive investigation and the draft of a subsequent application to the High Court.