An expert in organized crime and legal security at the United States embassy, Marko Magdic, explained that the Asset Forfeiture Law approved in the Dominican Republic on July 27 has regional and global challenges as a precedent, so those who are linked to the implementation process must be treated with special care and care in order to ensure the highest success rates in the application of this new regulation, since there are still pending tasks to move forward.
It affirms that it has become very clear that the forfeiture of domain should not replace criminal prosecution, but on the contrary, it is expected to become a complementary, additional and separate tool, in order to strengthen the way in which the State responds to criminality. especially the organized one.
Success at the regional level, in particular, and globally, in general, has been resounding, he said, since billions of dollars, both in cash and property, vehicles, aircraft, ships and illicit companies have been affected, depriving them of those that they acquired them illegally or used them for illegal purposes.
Measures
Marko Magdic cited that, at the regional level, an excessive duration of domain forfeiture processes, some lasting more than five years, was seen as a problem that has not been easy to solve, the Dominican Republic wisely established limited deadlines that would keep us between four or 10 months.
The autonomy of domain extinction in relation to criminal proceedings has not been understood in the same way in all jurisdictions, which has generated more than one inconvenience when the first was subject to the second, making it practically inefficient in terms of results. and time.
It is, he said, another aspect successfully circumvented by the law approved in the Dominican Republic, which separated, as most legislations have done, both regimes, which derives from the autonomous nature of domain forfeiture. He also mentioned the questions about the presumed burden of proof that would exist on third parties and have been replicated in most of the systems that have advanced in having domain forfeiture laws.
“Certain legal sectors are concerned that the third parties had to prove their good faith and that, given the impossibility of doing so, they would be stripped of their assets. In spite of everything, and beyond the discussions that could take place on how invested this burden is or not for third parties, the concrete fact is that in the Dominican case this has been settled categorically: the good faith of the third parties is presumed. third parties, and it will be the Public Ministry who will have to distort it, and it will finally be a Court that will assess whether this requirement was met, “he said.
Marko Magdic is a lawyer, senior consultant in public security and organized crime, with more than 20 years of experience in the prevention and control of crimes and complex criminal phenomena. He is a nationalized Chilean. In the country, it has been working for more than 15 years, which has allowed it not only to know the institutional capacities but also the local reality in a large part of the territory, developing training and advisory activities on organized crime, money laundering and domain extinction that involved from the Attorney General’s Office (PGR) and Judicial Power to the Financial Analysis Unit (UAF); DGII, and DGA. For about a year he has been immersed in providing technical advice on domain forfeiture, taking into account the current national scenario.
asset management
The expert assures that asset management can become a headache if it is not approached seriously and with excessive concern. There are many jurisdictions that have gone through and are going through the challenge of having efficient administration systems in relation to extinguished assets and subject to precautionary measures, he said in this regard.
He also explained that although one year, the time of the legal vacancy of the domain forfeiture law, might seem scarce, the fact is that it is much higher than that of many other countries. Consequently, it is urgent to advance in the prompt approval of a good law for the administration, disposition and distribution of assets seized, forfeited and/or extinguished, he pointed out.
Source
Magdic explained that the damage caused by Pablo Escobar was one of the reasons for applying the law. “He ran on December 2, 1993 and Pablo Escobar fell down. Half-naked, practically alone, and without the economic power that gave him impunity for years. It was evident that the loss and affectation of the financial structures that supported his vast criminal empire was one of the determining factors to stop his criminal actions that caused so much damage worldwide, “he said.
From then on, he added, an important part of the countries of the region and the world began to implement domain forfeiture laws.
Magdic mentioned the need to generate mechanisms and willingness for national (inter-agency) and international cooperation.
