Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-20-Speech-3-195"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021120.3.3-195"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
As the rapporteur points out, one of the most effective instruments for combating organised crime is the seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of illegal activities, particularly when such proceeds are destined for laundering. The lack of coordination between the various crime-fighting bodies can only benefit those involved in such activities, which means that we must, to this end, improve mutual assistance in the fight to capture the proceeds of organised crime. These initiatives and the rapporteur have both sought to establish a designated framework for action under the framework decisions, to safeguard the necessary independence of the national authorities when dealing specifically with incidents that have occurred within their territory – whilst at the same time providing for common mechanisms for regulation in order to pursue the shared commitment to combat all forms of organised crime, in line with the conclusions of the Tampere Council. The rapporteur has also taken care to ensure that, when considering the illegal origin of property, the inversion of the onus of proof only applies when the prosecution can prove that the property possessed is disproportionate to declared income or the activity pursued, with the person convicted then having the onus to prove the lawful origin of the property. I have therefore voted in favour of the report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples