Konstitucionālo tiesību aizskārumi tiesu praksē par mantas atzīšanu par noziedzīgi iegūtu

Analysis of non-conviction based asset forfeiture laws, policies and court decisions leads to a conclusion that the fundamental human right to property is violated on a systemic scale – standards of proof fall below standard of preponderance of evidence established by current Criminal Law, leading to confiscation of assets without a proof of true criminal origin. Meanwhile, the proof of the criminal origin of assets in most cases is neither linked to the existence of a predicate crime, nor to the traceability of assets from such crime. De facto, in most cases the only sufficient ground for asset forfeiture is a transactional activity match to suspicious transaction methodology by FIU – the lowest possible level of standard of proof, not reaching even the standards of reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Moreover, it is made difficult to prove the legal origin of the property, restricting admission of evidence of legality, as well as presuming “that there should be no difficulty in proving legitimate origin”, regardless of the asset size, transaction history and objective capabilities of the owner.