In the context of financial crime the recovery of stolen assets is an essential aspect of sanctioning of corruption and it can remedy some of the social harm caused by corruption. These considerations are equally relevant when prosecuting international crimes such as war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide.

While financial motives may not be obvious, armed conflicts create environments susceptible to corruption. For example, the Milosevic regime reportedly stole over USD 1 billion during the Yugoslav wars; the UN Security Council passed a resolution requiring member states to freeze the assets of Charles Taylor that were estimated at USD 400 million; and the Gaddafi family is suspected of having billions of dollars hidden in various jurisdictions.

In 2014 the European Union lifted a freeze on the Milosevic assets because his family no longer posed a threat to democracy. And, while Taylor’s assets have yet to be located, Gaddafi's assets remain frozen in several jurisdictions since 2011.

As the connection between corruption and international crimes gains more recognition, asset recovery is emerging as a useful means to deter and punish both the financial crimes and the related international crimes, and to return the stolen assets and provide victim compensation. Depriving the perpetrators of their illegally obtained wealth facilitates efforts to ensure compensation of the victims for their suffering. 

In fact, the Rome Statute and the rules of evidence and procedure of the International Criminal Court permit reparation to victims after the conviction of the perpetrator (Art. 75). State Parties are required to cooperate in relation to the identification, tracing and freezing of assets for eventual forfeiture (Art. 93(1)(k)) and a forfeiture of proceeds, property and other assets “derived directly or indirectly” from the crime may be ordered as one of the penalties (Art. 77(2)(b).

We need to, however, manage our expectations of integrating asset tracing in the investigation of international crimes. The recovery of stolen assets is a highly complex and lengthy endeavour, and only limited success can be reported thus far. Multiple hurdles continue to stand in the way of quick recoveries, such as the necessary adjustments in national legal frameworks for successful asset recovery and enhancement of institutional law enforcement capacities. This is aggravated by the constantly evolving sophistication of methods designed to hide illegally obtained assets.

Apart from such legal and technical intricacies, political will in the country of origin of the stolen funds and the countries in which the assets have been hidden is the ultimate key to success. If these obstacles are already slowing down progress of asset recovery in exclusively corruption cases, their impact will only be amplified in the context of international crimes.

This should, of course, not dissuade from pursuing this important financial angle of investigating international crimes. The impact of confiscating and repatriating stolen assets is far too great both as an anti-crime strategy and to foster rebuilding of societies recovering from conflict. Moreover, directing the end use of returned stolen assets to compensation measures facilitates victims reparations, as foreseen under the international criminal instruments mentioned above.