The Republic of Moldova is recommended to periodically review the effectiveness of the confiscation regime (proceeds from crime) and examine the case law. Consequently, and based on the findings, the authorities are invited to consider whether the declaration made is still needed and whether the Constitution could accommodate introduction of the reversal of burden of proof, IPN reports, quoting a press release of the Council of Europe.
In a report, the Conference of the Parties of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism evaluates the extent to which 34 States Parties have legislative or other measures in place for the burden of proof to be reversed, a possibility provided for in Article 3 (4) of the treaty.
The given Convention is the only international treaty that gives national authorities the power to halt suspicious transactions at the earliest stage to prevent their movement through the financial system. In addition, specialized Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) of member-states must halt such transactions whenever requested by a foreign partner FIU.
The Republic of Moldova is among the eight countries that have made a declaration not to apply – fully or partially – Art. 3 (4), and do not apply it in practice, alongside Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, Slovakia, Sweden and Turkey. The Conference of the Parties encourages the states to reconsider their declarations that they will not apply this article of the treaty, particularly those already applying its principles in practice.
It is concluded that the Republic of Moldova – under the current constitutional conditions – is not in a position to establish a reversal of the burden of proof into its legal system. However, the country introduced ‘extended confiscation’ which, within the limits provided by the Constitution, aims at increasing the effectiveness of the confiscation regime in general.
