Luigi Foffani, Valsamis Mitsilegas, Pedro Caeiro
EU legislation in the field of financial and organised crime is affected by different issues. The anti-money laundering (and counter-terrorist financing) legislation is dense, but it still lacks effectiveness. Although the approximation between the Member States still presents some concerns, what seems to be desirable is not further legislative intervention from the EU but to foster monitoring activities (on criminal law usage, suspicious transaction reports, and FIU functioning, etc.). In this context, a specialised agency could be of remarkable value, but the corresponding draft needs accurate analysis. With regard to organised crime, FD 2008/841/JHA features too narrow a scope, on the one hand, when it requires the aim of obtaining “financial or other material benefit.” On the other hand, the EU definitions on the matter are too broad (e.g., as to what concerns participation in a criminal organisation). A more specific set of autonomous definitions oriented towards the specific forms of crime that criminal organisations aim their activities at would considerably enhance and facilitate judicial cooperation. In this regard, not only a review of the broad EU definitions is encouraged, but the FD itself should be quickly replaced. The current EU legal framework on corruption in both the public and private sectors also seems outdated, notwithstanding the pivotal role of such matters on EU criminal policy. Although EU law already provides for a duty to criminalise corruption in the private sector, it does not sufficiently clarify the object of protection, i.e., “fair competition.” This enables possible national transpositions that may thwart the utility of the relevant criminalising provisions. In addition, a definition of EU officials in EU law is desirable as well as the introduction of corruption-related crimes concerning such subjects in the Euro-crimes list.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados