世界银行-从损失到收益_释放基于等值的资产追回措施的潜力（英）-2025_71页_2mb

From Loss to Gain: Unlocking the Potential of Equivalent Value-Based Measures in Asset Recovery

Background & Gaps

• Global corruption costs ≈5% of GDP; successful asset recovery remains insufficient.
• EVB measures (equivalent value-based confiscation) enable seizing property equal in value to proceeds of crime, regardless of origin.

Rationale for EVB Measures

• Addresses challenges in linking assets to specific crimes (e.g., complex financial crimes).
• Prevents dissipation of illicit assets during lengthy legal processes.

International Legal Frameworks

• UNCAC mandates EVB confiscation for proceeds and instrumentalities.
• Other treaties (e.g., EU Directives, OECD, African Union) also require EVB measures.
• EVB aligns with international trends toward broader asset recovery.

National Experiences & Challenges

• Approaches vary:
  • Civil law: Often permit EVB as primary tool (e.g., France).
  • Common law: Typically use EVB as subsidiary (e.g., UK).
• Key challenges include:
  • Lack of practitioner familiarity with EVB.
  • Complex benefit calculations.
  • Inconsistent terminology hinders mutual legal assistance (MLA).

Risks & Limitations

• Insufficient data on EVB usage.
• Potential misuse (e.g., defendants replacing assets or obtaining loans).
• Proportionality concerns (e.g., Switzerland).

Recommendations

1. Legislative Strengthening:
   • Domesticize international treaty provisions.
   • Adopt EVB as a primary tool wherever feasible.
2. Awareness Training:
   • Organize seminars on EVB for practitioners.
   • Develop training modules on MLA and terminology.
3. Enhanced Cooperation:
   • Standardize terminology to improve MLA effectiveness.
   • Expand the use of EVB provisional measures.

Conclusion

EVB measures offer a powerful tool to combat asset recovery gaps, but their full potential requires coordinated legislative and capacity-building efforts.