| Dual criminality for offences committed internationally
1. The minimum standard. Predicate offences for money laundering should extend to conduct that occurred in another country, which constitutes an offence in that country, and which would have constituted a predicate offence had it occurred domestically (R. 3, IN).
| Proceeds from the crime are laundered in Alpha
| | In Beta this conduct is a predicate offence for money laundering
| | In Alpha this conduct is not a predicate offence for money laundering
| | “Dual criminality” test requires the conduct to be a predicate offence both in the other country and domestically (in countries Alpha and Beta). It would allow for prosecution on ML charges in Alpha based upon the fact that in Beta such conduct is a predicate offence to money laundering.
| | The money launderer will be prosecuted in Alpha
|
2. A broader approach that countries may follow. Countries may provide that the only prerequisite is that the conduct would have constituted a predicate offence had it occurred domestically.
| Proceeds from the crime are laundered in Alpha
| | In Beta this conduct is not a predicate offence for money laundering
| | In Alpha this conduct is a predicate offence for money laundering
| | This approach would allow for prosecution where the proceeds were generated by conduct that was not a predicate offense in the country where the conduct was committed, but was an offense in the country where the proceeds were laundered.
| | The money launderer will be prosecuted in Beta
|
4.3. “State of mind” connected with a money laundering offence
The intent and knowledge required to prove the offence of money laundering may be inferred from objective factual circumstances. (R. 3, IN).
| The offence of money laundering
| | Objective factual circumstances
| | Vienna Convention, Art. 2.3
| | Palermo Convention, Art. 5.2
| | Merida Convention, Art. 28
| | Warsaw Convention, Art. 9.2.b
| | The offender ought to have assumed that the property was proceeds
| | Warsaw Convention, Art. 9.3.b
| | The offender suspected that the property was proceeds
| | Warsaw Convention, Art. 9.3.a
|
Date: 2015-01-29; view: 1296
|
