资本没收

Gilad Miron
{"title":"资本没收","authors":"Gilad Miron","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3728707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This work deals with a constitutional issue regarding the proprietary protection of a defendant or suspect in a criminal proceeding. Naturally, in today's constitutional era, we are concerned with the balance between the public and state interests in combating the criminality of corruption, money laundering and bribery by forfeiture of property acquired and obtained through criminal and economic offenses, and the protection of the constitutional right of the perpetrator or a third party claiming rights to property decided by state authorities by court order. In general, the aforementioned balance is unorthodox because it folds criminal aspects inherent in the basic purpose of combating crime, money laundering and corruption, and 'civil' aspects of protecting the property that has been explicitly anchored in the Basic Law: human dignity and liberty, and raising the right to the status of constitutional right. This means that a person whose property is forfeited can claim protection of his right to property that is forfeiture and that forfeiture is an unreasonable and disproportionate act. In these circumstances, it is possible that the decision is found in balancing the rationales underlying the above principles or rights that are struggling for the premiere. On the one hand, it is in the public interest to fight delinquency through economic means in order to achieve deterrence and punishment among the public and criminal bodies (criminal bodies) and the protection of an individual's proprietary right to his property. <br><br>In general, when criminal suspicion arises and the existence of grounds for forfeiture of property, such as property obtained in the past of drug trafficking or money laundering and/or as part of a fight against a criminal organization, the state is entitled to require the court to issue a temporary forfeiture order for the property involved in criminal matters until the sentence is handed down in which the court will decide definitively regarding the forfeiture of the seized and forfeiture of property. Forfeiture is expressed in real assets and other assets such as bank accounts, including the interest that grew on the forfeiture fund.","PeriodicalId":268118,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Procedure (Criminal Procedure) (Topic)","volume":"123 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Capital Forfeiture\",\"authors\":\"Gilad Miron\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3728707\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This work deals with a constitutional issue regarding the proprietary protection of a defendant or suspect in a criminal proceeding. Naturally, in today's constitutional era, we are concerned with the balance between the public and state interests in combating the criminality of corruption, money laundering and bribery by forfeiture of property acquired and obtained through criminal and economic offenses, and the protection of the constitutional right of the perpetrator or a third party claiming rights to property decided by state authorities by court order. In general, the aforementioned balance is unorthodox because it folds criminal aspects inherent in the basic purpose of combating crime, money laundering and corruption, and 'civil' aspects of protecting the property that has been explicitly anchored in the Basic Law: human dignity and liberty, and raising the right to the status of constitutional right. This means that a person whose property is forfeited can claim protection of his right to property that is forfeiture and that forfeiture is an unreasonable and disproportionate act. In these circumstances, it is possible that the decision is found in balancing the rationales underlying the above principles or rights that are struggling for the premiere. On the one hand, it is in the public interest to fight delinquency through economic means in order to achieve deterrence and punishment among the public and criminal bodies (criminal bodies) and the protection of an individual's proprietary right to his property. <br><br>In general, when criminal suspicion arises and the existence of grounds for forfeiture of property, such as property obtained in the past of drug trafficking or money laundering and/or as part of a fight against a criminal organization, the state is entitled to require the court to issue a temporary forfeiture order for the property involved in criminal matters until the sentence is handed down in which the court will decide definitively regarding the forfeiture of the seized and forfeiture of property. Forfeiture is expressed in real assets and other assets such as bank accounts, including the interest that grew on the forfeiture fund.\",\"PeriodicalId\":268118,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"LSN: Procedure (Criminal Procedure) (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"123 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"LSN: Procedure (Criminal Procedure) (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3728707\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Procedure (Criminal Procedure) (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3728707","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项工作涉及关于刑事诉讼中被告或嫌疑人的所有权保护的宪法问题。当然,在今天的宪法时代,我们关心的是公共利益和国家利益之间的平衡,即通过没收通过刑事和经济犯罪获得和获得的财产来打击腐败、洗钱和贿赂犯罪,以及保护行为人或国家当局通过法院命令决定的对财产主张权利的第三方的宪法权利。总的来说,上述平衡是不正统的,因为它将打击犯罪、洗钱和腐败的基本目的所固有的刑事方面,与《基本法》明确规定的保护财产的“民事”方面混为一谈:人的尊严和自由,并将权利提升到宪法权利的地位。这意味着财产被没收的人可以要求保护他对被没收财产的权利,而没收财产是一种不合理和不成比例的行为。在这种情况下,这一决定有可能是在平衡上述原则或权利背后的理由时做出的,这些原则或权利正在为首映而斗争。一方面,通过经济手段打击犯罪行为,以实现公共和刑事机构(刑事机构)之间的威慑和惩罚,并保护个人对其财产的所有权,符合公共利益。一般来说,当出现犯罪嫌疑和有理由没收财产时,例如在过去贩毒或洗钱中获得的财产和(或)作为打击犯罪组织的一部分,国家有权要求法院对涉及刑事事项的财产发出临时没收令,直到法院就没收被扣押财产和没收财产作出最终判决为止。没收以实物资产和其他资产(如银行账户)表示,包括没收基金增长的利息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Capital Forfeiture
This work deals with a constitutional issue regarding the proprietary protection of a defendant or suspect in a criminal proceeding. Naturally, in today's constitutional era, we are concerned with the balance between the public and state interests in combating the criminality of corruption, money laundering and bribery by forfeiture of property acquired and obtained through criminal and economic offenses, and the protection of the constitutional right of the perpetrator or a third party claiming rights to property decided by state authorities by court order. In general, the aforementioned balance is unorthodox because it folds criminal aspects inherent in the basic purpose of combating crime, money laundering and corruption, and 'civil' aspects of protecting the property that has been explicitly anchored in the Basic Law: human dignity and liberty, and raising the right to the status of constitutional right. This means that a person whose property is forfeited can claim protection of his right to property that is forfeiture and that forfeiture is an unreasonable and disproportionate act. In these circumstances, it is possible that the decision is found in balancing the rationales underlying the above principles or rights that are struggling for the premiere. On the one hand, it is in the public interest to fight delinquency through economic means in order to achieve deterrence and punishment among the public and criminal bodies (criminal bodies) and the protection of an individual's proprietary right to his property.

In general, when criminal suspicion arises and the existence of grounds for forfeiture of property, such as property obtained in the past of drug trafficking or money laundering and/or as part of a fight against a criminal organization, the state is entitled to require the court to issue a temporary forfeiture order for the property involved in criminal matters until the sentence is handed down in which the court will decide definitively regarding the forfeiture of the seized and forfeiture of property. Forfeiture is expressed in real assets and other assets such as bank accounts, including the interest that grew on the forfeiture fund.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信