International cooperation

Enhancing cooperation in asset recovery is vital for crime prevention

This article by Iker Lekuona explains the importance of asset recovery for crime prevention and highlights three vital aspects of international cooperation in corruption and asset recovery cases: informal cooperation mechanisms, trust and technical assistance. It is republished with permission from the 6th Newsletter of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme Network of Institutes PNI . We participate in this network of 18 institutes and entities and strongly support the PNI's mission to "assist the international community in strengthening cooperation in crime prevention and criminal justice on the global, regional and sub-regional levels, within the framework of the United Nations Crime Programme." Find all newsletters and information about the PNI here. At first glance, the Kyoto Declaration’s fourth pillar may appear to combine two separate things. Why should “international cooperation” and “technical assistance” be connected? The Basel Institute’s International Centre for Asset Recovery ICAR provides technical assistance to over 18 jurisdictions across Africa, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Asia. We work hand in hand with our partner governments to strengthen the capacity of law enforcement and criminal justice systems to investigate and prosecute financial crimes and recover illicit assets. International cooperation is a vital part of the asset recovery process and of the technical assistance that we provide. The transnational, high-level cases of corruption and money laundering that we support often involve multiple jurisdictions in which criminal proceeds are sourced, transferred, laundered, hidden and spent. We see constantly that when it comes to asset recovery as a means to prevent and address corruption and other serious transnational crimes, international cooperation and technical assistance go hand in hand. Asset recovery: key to preventing crime In the eyes of the public, asset recovery is often seen through the lens of enforcement. It is linked to prosecutions and sanctions and to the desire for justice to be done. But as Article 70 of the Kyoto Declaration emphasises, asset recovery is “an important element of crime prevention… particularly in cases involving corruption”. At the Basel Institute, we see prevention and enforcement as two sides of the same coin – complementary ways to change behaviours and social norms towards integrity. For asset recovery, three areas stand out. Deterrence: Confiscating criminal assets tackles the primary incentive to engage in financial crimes: the money, which is a gateway to power and influence. When public agencies and their foreign counterparts work efficiently to investigate, confiscate and recover illicit assets, this has a strong deterrent effect. Disruption: The financial investigations at the heart of the asset recovery process are key to understanding and disrupting organised criminal networks. Techniques such as social network analysis can build on these investigations, mapping the relationships between individuals and entities involved in criminal enterprises, from wildlife trafficking to grand corruption and money laundering schemes. Trust: When citizens see that illicit assets are confiscated from corrupt individuals and high-level criminals, this helps to build trust in state institutions and to foster a more stable social environment. This effect is enhanced when recovered assets are reinvested in public goods – for example as Kenya did to pay for hospital equipment during the Covid-19 pandemic or as Zambia has done to fund university education for underprivileged students. Our technical assistance to partner governments focuses on strengthening every link in the asset recovery process or “chain” – from detection of criminal assets right through to their recovery and return. Sometimes this can go further. In Peru, assets recovered in landmark cases from Switzerland and Luxembourg are being channelled into strengthening the criminal justice system, under an ongoing tripartite agreement that ICAR facilitated. Through this approach, we see tangible impacts on the strength and functioning of criminal justice systems as a whole in our partner countries. And that can only be positive for crime prevention. Evolutions in international cooperation for asset recovery Over the nearly two decades that ICAR has been active as a specialised centre of the Basel Institute on Governance, we have seen promising evolutions in international cooperation in the context of asset recovery: 1\. Informal cooperation mechanisms and networks In line with the Kyoto Declaration’s articles 63 and 64, we have seen a blossoming of positive initiatives to boost informal cooperation between competent authorities on transnational cases of corruption and asset recovery. Such informal cooperation is vital to obtaining intelligence and building connections between counterparts from across borders. The Global Operational Network of Anti-Corruption Law Enforcement Authorities GlobE Network facilitated by UNODC is one such initiative. It eases the exchange of information between frontline anti-corruption law enforcement practitioners across the world. As an observer member, ICAR contributes its experience to the network’s growing efforts to accelerate efforts to identify, trace and confiscate the proceeds of crime. The International Anti-Corruption Coordination Centre IACCC and the Global Forum for Asset Recovery Action Series are two other initiatives that have been game changers in terms of expediting intelligence sharing and cooperation on priority cases. The first is hosted by the UK government, while the second is an initiative of ICAR and the World Bank’s StAR Initiative together with the IACCC. These mechanisms are leading to tangible results in smoothening and complementing formal mutual legal assistance processes. 2\. Trust and relationships The softer aspects of international cooperation shouldn’t be underestimated. We see daily in our work how trust and good relationships between authorities engaged in mutual legal assistance are essential to smoothen the process and lead to a successful result. This aspect was vital to achieving Colombia’s first-ever international asset return using its non-conviction based forfeiture law in 2024, of nearly half a million dollars in proceeds of drug trafficking from Guernsey. The Colombian authorities recognised ICAR’s “contribution and experience \ which\ facilitated the rapprochement and communication between the Colombian Attorney General’s Office and His Majesty’s Procureur’s Office in Guernsey.” They noted that “\ t\ his has been an excellent example of how judicial authorities can work together to ensure the recovery of the proceeds derived from criminal activities.” Trust, sustained collaboration, communication and positive relationships are also at the heart of successful asset return agreements and frameworks. One example is Jersey’s return of around USD 3.7 million in corruptly obtained funds to Kenya, in a case that had previously been stalled for a decade. Proactive informal cooperation, which ICAR helped to facilitate, was key to building trust between the parties, breaking the deadlock, finding legal solutions to recover the funds and agreeing their safe return for the benefit of Kenyan citizens. This case was the first asset return under another innovative cooperation agreement based on a sustained relationship of trust: the Framework for the Return of Assets from Corruption and Crime in Kenya FRACCK . Agreed and signed by the Governments of Kenya, Jersey, Switzerland and the UK, this was praised by UNODC’s Officer-in-Charge of the Corruption and Economic Crime Branch as being an “innovative” and “novel” approach to asset return. 3\. Building capacity among international counterparts Article 66 of the Kyoto Declaration makes it clear why it is not enough just to focus on formal and informal cooperation mechanisms, and why technical assistance is vital to the functioning of the system as a whole. States, it says, should: promote, facilitate and support the widest measures of technical assistance, including material support and training, with a view to enabling law enforcement authorities and criminal justice institutions to effectively prevent and combat crimes, taking into account the specific challenges faced by and the particular needs of developing countries. International cooperation is a two-way street. Financial centres seeking to detect and confiscate illicit assets will need information and evidence from the countries in which the crimes took place. And a lot of time can be wasted if mutual legal assistance requests are poorly drafted or not in line with the receiving state’s requirements. Yet many jurisdictions that suffer the worst effects of corruption and crime have low capacity and resources for asset recovery and for international cooperation in general. That is why it is so vital for international donors to support technical assistance programmes aimed at supporting the international cooperation process and building the capacity of counterparts in lower-resource jurisdictions. This could take the form of financial support, such as the kind provided by ICAR’s core donor group: the governments of Jersey, Liechtenstein, Norway, Switzerland and the UK. This financial support for our hands-on mentoring and training in low-capacity jurisdictions has been vital in enabling us to remain agile and innovative, to pilot new methods before scaling them up, and to provide sustained assistance in partner countries beyond the usual short-term project lifecycle. To take just one example, our ongoing technical assistance programme in Peru has resulted in the development and implementation of a non-conviction based forfeiture law that has already led to the confiscation of millions in stolen assets domestically and internationally. Developing asset recovery communities and leaders is another area where states can provide resources and active participation as part of their efforts to promote technical assistance. Practitioner networks are vital for peer learning and to build those trust-based relationships that are so crucial to international cooperation. A standout example is the annual Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptocurrencies, which we organise with Europol and which UNODC hosted this year in Vienna. Conclusion Our ICAR teams around the world see at first hand the importance of asset recovery for crime prevention, as the Kyoto Declaration emphasises. Recovering assets helps to deter corruption and criminality, disrupt criminal networks and build citizens' trust. To boost asset recovery, we need to strengthen every link in the asset recovery process or "chain", from early detection of illicit assets to their eventual recovery and return. And for that, technical assistance is vital. This article highlights three key areas of technical assistance that align with the Kyoto Declaration's spirit, ICAR's strategic approach and UN-led actions: informal information-sharing mechanisms and networks; efforts to build trust and relationships to smoothen international cooperation; and capacity building between countries. Learn more Read Working Paper 51: Good practices in asset recovery legislation in selected OSCE participating States, by Andrew Dornbierer.

Mozambique builds capacity to investigate transnational corruption and money laundering cases

A cross-agency training workshop in Mozambique has boosted the skills of anti-corruption practitioners to investigate offshore structures used to hide and launder money and to request information and evidence from abroad. The training team of the International Centre for Asset Recovery ICAR conducted the intensive workshop from 8–12 August at the Prosecutor General’s Office in the capital Maputo. Alongside public prosecutors were members of Mozambique’s Asset Recovery Office, Financial Intelligence Unit, Central and Provincial Anti-Corruption Offices, and National Criminal Investigation Service. From shell companies to international cooperation Building on two foundational training programmes in 2019 on financial investigations and asset recovery, the workshop served to deepen the expertise of participants in two challenging areas of international asset recovery: Gaining information and evidence from abroad through mutual legal assistance MLA in criminal matters. Investigating financial flows through offshore corporate structures such as shell companies and trusts. As per ICAR’s unique methodology, the participants worked in small groups to “investigate” a complex transnational corruption and money laundering case. This allowed them to put the new skills and knowledge into practice right away. For example, unravelling the beneficial ownership of assets held in an offshore shell company was needed to link criminal activity in the simulated investigation with the perpetrators and the proceeds of crime. Essential to transnational investigations Both aspects of the training – offshore structures and MLA – are essential in tackling transnational corruption and money laundering cases such as the so-called hidden debt scandal. Still ongoing, the case involves billions of dollars of undeclared loans and undue payments to foreign and national citizens, including high-ranking officials. It plunged Mozambique into a financial crisis and spilled over into multiple jurisdictions, requiring extensive international cooperation. As the Director of Mozambique’s Asset Recovery Office, Amélia Machava, said in a presentation during the week, Mozambique is not the only country to suffer challenges in obtaining international cooperation through MLA. Common obstacles include language and communication barriers, differences in legal systems, difficulties in identifying relevant contact persons, delays in obtaining a response, and claims of a “fishing expedition” where the information requested is not fully clear. Participants said the training “opened up more horizons” in terms of investigating offshore companies and trust funds, which are “not known under Mozambican law”. Others commented on the usefulness of understanding not only how MLA works but other “rapid non-formal ways to collect data to substantiate the MLA request.” Learn more See a news article about the training published by the Club of Mozambique. Learn about ICAR training programmes and download a current brochure in English, French, Portuguese and Spanish. Read Phyllis Atkinson’s quick guide to offshore structures and beneficial ownership. Take our self-paced eLearning course on International cooperation and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters, available for free on Basel LEARN with certificate of completion .

International cooperation in illicit enrichment cases – scope for reform?

Why is international cooperation in asset recovery cases based on illicit enrichment/unexplained wealth laws a particularly challenging issue? This is a question we have received from many corners of the world following our publication last year of an open-access book on Illicit Enrichment: A Guide to Laws Targeting Unexplained Wealth . In this annexed contribution to the book, Jonathan Spicer explains why international cooperation in illicit enrichment cases can come up against barriers – and asks whether there is scope for reform. Jonathan is Senior Asset Recovery Specialist at the Basel Institute’s International Centre for Asset Recovery. He worked closely with the book’s author, Andrew Dornbierer, during the book’s development and editing. Illicit Enrichment is freely available to read and download at illicitenrichment.org. A Spanish version of the book is available here: Enriquecimiento ilícito: Una guía sobre las leyes que abordan los activos de procedencia inexplicable. Why international cooperation is needed Criminal activity is not confined to national borders and illicit enrichment investigations will often have an international element. Investigators may seek information or evidence from other jurisdictions which relates to the suspected criminal activity that has led to the illicit enrichment or that relates to the possession, concealment or use of illicit assets. For example, a public official may be suspected of using a foreign corporate structure to hold illicit funds in bank accounts in another jurisdiction. In order to progress the investigation and potentially freeze the funds , prosecutors will need to use mutual legal assistance MLA to obtain evidence from the respective jurisdictions where the foreign company is registered and where the bank account is located. Alternatively, it may be known that the child of a public official attends a renowned and expensive fee-paying school overseas. Investigators would be seeking information not only on the amount of fees that have been paid, but also on the source and manner of the payments. The school may voluntarily provide the information on the payment of the fees, but if it does not a court order will be necessary. Accordingly, insofar as this information is not publicly available, assistance will be required from the authorities in the jurisdictions where intelligence or evidence is held. Whether that jurisdiction is able to assist will usually depend upon its domestic law and also whether it has either illicit enrichment as an offence or civil procedure. Formal and informal cooperation channels International cooperation exists at both informal and formal levels. Informal international cooperation is usually seen as cooperation at a law enforcement level or as police-to-police assistance. Often this will amount to intelligence sharing for example between financial intelligence units or it may involve assistance which can be provided without the need for coercive measures such as obtaining the voluntary assistance of the school in the example above . As these enquiries may be made at an early stage where the investigation is not limited to illicit enrichment but also looking at underlying criminality, there are likely to be fewer difficulties in obtaining assistance. Formal means of international cooperation, known as MLA, is where a state requests another state to apply its laws to obtain evidence for use in the proceedings being brought by the requesting state. This cooperation usually requires the use of coercive measures by the requested state, for example searches of properties, interviewing of witnesses or production of documents. This formal means of cooperation is usually based on multilateral treaties, bilateral treaties or other forms of state to state agreements. In terms of illicit enrichment proceedings, MLA may be required to obtain evidence during the investigation stage, for example bank statements, or may be required to freeze assets or to enforce a final order for confiscation. Dual criminality – an obstacle to international cooperation Under the dual criminality principle, States will only provide MLA in criminal matters if the offence being investigated in the requesting State is also an offence in the State being asked to provide assistance. The application of this principle by States which do not recognise an offence of illicit enrichment can often be an obstacle to international cooperation in illicit enrichment investigations. The promotion of the criminalisation of illicit enrichment as a measure to tackle corruption is seen within UNCAC Article 20 as well as other regional treaties such as IACAC Article IX or AUCPCC Article 8 . However the introduction of illicit enrichment offences is not compulsory under these conventions. Under UNCAC and the AUCPCC, non-mandatory language permits States to decide themselves whether to implement illicit enrichment laws, while under the IACAC, States may also refrain from introducing an illicit enrichment offence if they deem that it will contravene existing constitutional rights. Providing assistance despite a lack of dual criminality While the IACAC and AUCPCC do not address the issue of dual criminality directly, they both have almost identical provisions on assistance to be provided in illicit enrichment investigations, by States Parties that do not introduce illicit enrichment offences. Under IACAC at Article IX paragraph 3: Any State Party that has not established illicit enrichment as an offense shall, insofar as its laws permit, provide assistance and cooperation with respect to this offense as provided in this Convention. The United States of America posted a reservation on its signing of the IACAC, where it stated that it understood it was not obligated to introduce an offence of illicit enrichment, as this would be inconsistent with the United States constitution and fundamental legal principles due to the burden of proof being placed on the defendant. However, the U.S. does make clear that as far as it is permitted by domestic law, it does intend to assist and cooperate with other States Parties investigating illicit enrichment. The provisions of UNCAC emphasise the need for cooperation and address dual criminality directly. Article 43 1 mandates State Parties to cooperate in criminal matters in accordance with Article 44 to 50 of the Convention, before addressing dual criminality in Article 43 2 : In matters of international cooperation, whenever dual criminality is considered a requirement, it shall be deemed fulfilled irrespective of whether the laws of the requested State Party place the offence within the same category of offence or denominate the offence by the same terminology as the requesting State Party, if the conduct underlying the offence for which assistance is sought is a criminal offence under the laws of both States Parties. Thus, States Parties receiving MLA requests cannot refuse on the basis of the name of the offence or the category under which it is deemed to fall, but must look at the actual conduct which constitutes the offence and consider whether this would amount to an offence under the domestic law. However, illicit enrichment offences, and particularly those that include a shifting of the burden of proof on to the defendant, do not compare easily with other types of offending. Nonetheless, Article 46, which addresses MLA, requires State Parties to “afford one another the widest measure of mutual legal assistance in investigations, prosecutions and judicial proceedings in relation to the offences covered by \ the\ Convention”. Finally, Article 46 9 of UNCAC makes further provision on MLA and dual criminality: a A requested State Party, in responding to a request for assistance pursuant to this article in the absence of dual criminality, shall take into account the purposes of this Convention, as set forth in article 1; b States Parties may decline to render assistance pursuant to this article on the ground of absence of dual criminality. However, a requested State Party shall, where consistent with the basic concepts of its legal system, render assistance that does not involve coercive action. Such assistance may be refused when requests involve matters of a de minimis nature or matters for which the cooperation or assistance sought is available under other provisions of this Convention; c Each State Party may consider adopting such measures as may be necessary to enable it to provide a wider scope of assistance pursuant to this article in the absence of dual criminality. It can be said, therefore, that the framers of the Convention sought to encourage the provision of assistance by States Parties which had not criminalised offences under the Convention including illicit enrichment to those States Parties which have. Requested States need to consider the purposes of the Convention under Article 1 and to consider whether it is possible to provide assistance falling short of coercive measures under their domestic law. Pragmatic solutions to practical challenges Despite these provisions, the lack of dual criminality may still prevent jurisdictions from using coercive measures to provide assistance in illicit enrichment investigations / prosecutions. Where this is the case, requesting States may be able to obtain help by outlining the suspected criminal behaviour which is thought to have led to the illicit enrichment. When this behaviour is considered by the requested State, it may consider that it is possible to provide support in the obtaining of evidence using coercive measures. In this respect, requesting States should consider providing a wide explanation of the facts revealed by the investigation and the activities of the suspects, as this will potentially provide grounds for the requested State to assist. Caveat: the specialty principle There is a caveat that should be highlighted here, which is the rule of specialty. This is that the evidence which is obtained by the requested State should only be used for the investigation or proceedings stated in the request. Therefore, it would not be permitted to apply for evidence on the basis of a corruption investigation and then use it in a hitherto unmentioned prosecution for illicit enrichment. Permission has to be sought from the State which provided the evidence. Scope for reform? One of the reasons for the adoption by States of a criminal offence of illicit enrichment is due to the difficulties in investigating the underlying criminality, especially in cases of corruption. However, an offence of illicit enrichment has not been widely adopted in those States where the assets may be held or through which they have been laundered. Notwithstanding this, many of those States encourage the adoption of procedures which tackle corruption and may have some alternative form of addressing illicit wealth, for example non-conviction based forfeiture procedures incorporating unexplained wealth investigative orders such as the United Kingdom . This does not seem to be enough to overcome the issue of dual criminality for some jurisdictions. The question arises whether further steps should be taken internationally to promote a limited exception to the rule on dual criminality, which would apply to MLA requests to obtain evidence in illicit enrichment cases.

Malawian Police gain essential skills to combat money laundering and recover criminal proceeds

Investigators and prosecutors from the Malawi Police Service MPS have gained vital skills in financial investigations and asset recovery during a five-day intensive Financial Investigations and Asset Recovery training programme. This is the first time our ICAR Training Team has been able to deliver in-person training since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic. As well as members of the MPS, the 23 participants included prosecutors from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions and members of the Judiciary. The training supports the objectives of our multi-year Tackling Serious and Organised Corruption programme in Malawi, which is funded by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. Why do Malawian Police need specialised training? Just like other Malawian agencies, such as the Financial Intelligence Agency FIA or the Anti-Corruption Bureau ACB , the MPS is increasingly involved in the investigation and prosecution of money laundering cases and the recovery of criminal assets. However, one of the challenges raised during the workshop was a lack of experience and technical expertise to tackle such cases. This is not only because of the financial analysis skills required to investigate such cases, but also the transnational nature of large-scale corruption and money laundering. This requires, among other things, the ability to draft proper mutual legal assistance MLA requests. Learning new skills, applying them in day-to-day work The flagship Financial Investigations and Asset Recovery training programme provides participants with the essential skills and simple but yet powerful tools to handle high-profile and complex financial investigations. One Malawian investigator commented: This is one of the most excellent experiences so far. I have really learned a lot from our lectures, that I will surely use in my cases. I really appreciate the issues to do with money laundering, as currently I am handling a case that has that offence and I did not know how to go about it. I will surely use the knowledge gained this week in my cases as well as my daily work. The participants were immersed in a simulated corruption and money laundering investigation during which they actively followed investigative leads, made decisions, analysed and solved problems, using the Malawian legal framework. The experience also allowed them to reflect upon the challenges that such investigations entail and possible solutions to overcome them. A prosecutor stated that: The course has added some useful value as far as my daily work as a prosecutor is concerned. From now on, I will be able to guide the investigators who are investigating the financial crimes on how best we can successfully corner the perpetrators. As a prosecutor, I will be able from now on to apply for forfeiture orders wherever it is necessary. I can now easily prosecute financial crime-related offences. Learn more The ICAR training team delivers a range of tailored, high-impact training programmes to government partner agencies around the world. Find out more and download a brochure in English, Spanish, French and Portuguese. ICAR also offers free, interactive eLearning courses on critical skills in conducting financial investigations, gathering intelligence and international cooperation, including drafting MLA requests. Register on our virtual learning platform, Basel LEARN, and start learning today

Interview: Applying Peru’s non-conviction based forfeiture law in international cases

Oscar Solórzano, Head of Latin America at the Basel Institute on Governance and Senior Asset Recovery Specialist at our International Centre for Asset Recovery, interviewed Dr Hamilton Castro Trigoso, Provincial Prosecutor of the First Provisional Provincial Prosecutor's Office for Extinción de dominio in Lima, on his experiences in investigating and enforcing asset confiscation judgements abroad. The case that Hamilton Castro came to talk about is not just any case. It is a final decision that the prosecutor has just obtained in the Peruvian judicial system that recovers part of the assets of a General who collaborated with the criminal organisation led by Vladimiro Montesinos. Montesinos was the Head of Intelligence under the corrupt government of Alberto Fujimori and widely acknowledged as the former President’s right-hand man. The General fled the country and died before justice was able to catch him. But it is catching up with his assets and helping ensure they cannot now be enjoyed by his surviving relatives. Insightful viewers will be able to see and understand the emotion of the prosecutor, who maintains that his job is not only to recover illicit money but also to contribute to restoring the meaning of the word justice in Peru. You can watch the video in Spanish with English subtitles here or read the answers below in English translation. 1 – Solórzano: Dr. Castro, what does the confiscation of the Malca account mean for Peru? What does the judgement – after 20 years – signify for the country's fight against corruption? Castro: The Malca Villanueva case is of utmost importance for Peru for more than one reason. First, because of who the man was. General Malca Villanueva was a prominent member of Alberto Fujimori's government, serving as Minister of the Interior and then Minister of Defence. Afterwards, he was rewarded when he retired from the Ministry of Defense – from the Army – by being made Ambassador of Peru in Mexico. He carried out this diplomatic role for around two years, despite having no experience whatsoever. Second, this case carries a message of non-impunity regarding the recovery of illicit assets, even when part of them are held in accounts abroad. An important point about this case is that the criminal justice system in Peru was never able to apprehend General Malca Villanueva, nor his family. He died in 2015 in a resort in Brazil called Santa Catalina. So this judgement is extremely important. It sends a message that justice may take time, but it arrives nonetheless. 2 – It has been nearly three years since the Extinción de dominio law entered into force in Peru. How well is this non-conviction based forfeiture mechanism working in the country? I am optimistic about the implementation of Legislative Decree No. 1373, which is the law that introduces the mechanism of Extinción de dominio in Peru. The results in these two and a half years have been highly positive. The Specialised Prosecutors' Offices at the national level have achieved a large number of sentences in various cases. Some of these are extremely important, such as the case of Malca Villanueva, which show that the mechanism of Extinción de dominio is a well-crafted criminal policy tool targeting the assets of criminals. This has been quite well understood by our practitioners and has allowed definitive judgements to be obtained. Compared to the time it takes to prove the criminal responsibility of accused individuals in traditional criminal proceedings, and to confiscate their assets, Extinción de dominio is much faster. So, as I said, I am very optimistic about the implementation of this new law. Of course there is a long way to go. There are challenges we have to overcome and many tasks we still have to do \ for instance in relation to mutual legal assistance\ . We understand, however, that the rules are versatile. We cannot not rule out the possibility that at some point the Extinción de dominio law could be reformed in some aspects. Not just to make the law more effective in terms of prosecuting assets, but also about improving the provisions aimed at protecting the fundamental rights of affected persons. At the practical level, the subsystem suffers the shortcomings of any other prosecutorial body in Peru. But in general terms, both the Judicial Branch and the Public Prosecutor's Office have been able to put in place a specialised subsystem of prosecutors and judges. Their number may increase in the future depending on the workload. 3 - What do you think are the challenges that this tool faces at the international level? What can be done to improve its global application? The good success we have had over the last six years in recovering illicit assets abroad, especially in the Fujimori and Montesinos complex of cases, is linked to more than one factor. It was certainly not easy, and the successes are the result of the efforts of a large number of individuals and institutions, both in the requested and requesting States. We went knocking on the door of several countries with a new and unknown tool for them. It has taken us several years and a lot of effort to get recognition for our decisions of Extinción de dominio. By doing so, we have learned the difficulties associated with international judicial cooperation in criminal matters. One of these problems is the speed with which foreign evidence is obtained from abroad. For that, we have set up in Peru a swift system of legal procedures that include the transfer of evidence from criminal proceedings to Extinción de dominio. This has made it possible to save a lot of time, because the criminal proceedings had already gathered abundant evidence in the Malca Villanueva case. This even includes reviews of bank statements and financial information from other countries that were used in Extinción de dominio proceedings. The correct interpretation of the principle of speciality in this case has allowed us to use bank information from countries such as Switzerland, Panama or other financial centre in which the accounts that we are trying to recover are located. The modern, correct and lawful interpretation of this principle has allowed us to understand that it is not violated if the information obtained through international judicial cooperation is transferred from criminal proceedings to Extinción de dominio as these proceedings are criminal policy tools conceived to target criminal assets. There have been other success factors in recent years, but these first two are fundamental. I must also mention strategic alliances such as with the Basel Institute on Governance, which has allowed us to better understand the nature of these tools and of international judicial cooperation, and to establish proper and efficient contacts with authorities of other countries. This in turn has allowed us to use other mechanisms, such as spontaneous cooperation or informal information-sharing with the authorities of other countries. Within this framework of mutual cooperation, we have been able to move faster and obtain good results in recovering illicit funds deposited in accounts in financial centres such as Switzerland, Luxembourg, Andorra and others. Finally, it seems to me that these best practices have already had a good result and should be applied in the case of Malca Villanueva's Mexican bank account. The judgement we have obtained in Peru is not sufficient; through the mechanisms of international judicial cooperation, it will have to be transferred to Mexico for execution. All the experience that we have acquired in these years and in other cases will be useful to recover the USD 1.5 million or so stashed in Malca's account in Mexico. 4 – What is the key message that prosecutors in other countries should take into account when seeking to recover assets held in foreign jurisdictions? Legal practitioners, prosecutors and judges in any jurisdiction need to understand that recovering such assets goes beyond what the domestic jurisdiction can do alone. It is extremely important to establish partnerships with institutions that allow us to gain a better understanding of the tools of international judicial cooperation. This enables the requesting State to adjust to international standards and the standards of the requested State. The point is that judgements in these cases should not remain purely ornamental and domestic, but be duly executed in financial centres like Switzerland, Luxembourg or Andorra. These countries have a different legal system and in some cases respond to different legal traditions than Latin American countries. So it is important to establish direct contact with the authorities of those countries in order to understand their standards and ensure that our request for mutual legal assistance is duly executed there. More See the Malca Villanueva news story. Our technical and policy assistance in Peru, and this interview, are supported by the core donors of the International Centre for Asset Recovery as well as the Swiss State Secretariat for Economic Affairs SECO Cooperation in Peru through the multi-year Subnational Strengthening Public Finance Management programme. Watch the video

Recommendations of the International Cooperation for Anti-Corruption Cohort of the Summit for Democracy