standing group on organised crime: newsletter, sept. 2013, volume 10, issue 3

September 2013Volume 10, Issue 3

Editorial note In ThIs Issue

The ECPR Standing Group on Organ-ised Crime in the month of Septem-

ber has participated to two main events.First, the International Symposium onEconomic Crime, held for the 31st yearin Cambridge from the 1st to the 7th ofSeptember. ECPRSGOC members, in thisoccasion, on the 3rd ofSeptember, have beeninvited to participate tothree sections on thepast, present and futureof organised crimeawareness and re-search, contributing toround-tables and workshop alongsidepractitioners and experts in the field. AfterCambridge, ECPR SGOC membershave moved to the ECPR 7th AnnualGeneral Conference, held in Bordeauxfrom the 4th to the 7th of September. Assome of you might remember, the SGOChad organised a section on ‘Transna-

tional Organised Crime in a GlobalisedWorld’. The Section has been well at-tended and has allowed researchers toshare their insights and findings in ahighly interactive environment. Old andnew members had the chance to meet

also during the StandingGroup General Assembly,where a number of practi-cal issues for the evolutionof the SGOC have beendiscussed.

With the motivation re-newed in these

meetings, this issue of thenewsletter presents an interview with theEuropean Parliament CRIM committee, areflection piece on UK appraoches andtwo articles on financial aspects of thefight againstorganised crime.

Happy reading!

September in Cambridge and Bordeaux

by FALKO A. ERNST and ANNA SERGI (Editors)Centre for Criminology, University of Essex

Members of theSGOC have attendedboth the International

Symposium in Cambridgeand the ECPR General

Conference in Bordeaux

Newsletter

Meeting CrimInterview with MEP Salvatore

IacolinoPage 2

Non conviction-based Confi-scation within the new EU Direc-tive

by Fabio LicataPage 4

‘Know your enemy’: Reflec-tions on challenges faced by UKlaw enforcement agencies in po-licing international organisedcrime.

by Joseph WhittlePage 6

Endless opportunities –money laundering through highvalue portable commodities

by Nicholas GilmourPage 8

Calls for Papers, Conferen-ces, Miscellaneous

From page 10

Bordeaux, Place de la BourseImage Source wikimedia.org

http://www.sgocnet.org

Salvatore Iacolino is a Member ofthe European Parliament in the Group ofthe European People's Party (ChristianDemocrats)

1. Can you briefly explain how didthe Commission started? From whatideas and needs?

The Special Commission on Or-ganised Crime, Corruption and MoneyLaundering (CRIM) , for which I am theonly Rapporteur for the European Parlia-ment, was established in March 2012, inline with what had been decided in Octo-ber 2011 with a special resolution of theEuropean Parliament on organised crimein the European Union to which I had con-tributed within the Group of the PopularParty. CRIM stems from the evident con-sideration that the transnational dimen-sion of organised crime and the strongentrepreneurial spirit of criminal organisa-tions require a European response, com-mon legal standards and instruments forpolice and judicial authorities involved inthe fight. Europol estimates around 3600international criminal organisations, whichoperate in the EU and diversify their illicitactivities also in the legal economy, po-sing a threat to the safety and welfare ofcitizens, as well as to the internal market

2. What are the main objectives ofthe Commission in the short and me-dium-long term?

The CRIM Commission aims toanalyse and assess the extent of organi-sed crime, corruption and money launde-ring and their impact on the EU and itsMember States; analyse and evaluate thecurrent degree of implementation of thelegislation in the EU in the field of organi-sed crime, corruption, money launderingand related policies; examine and monitorthe implementation of the role and activi-ties of the agencies of the Union in thefield of Home Affairs - Europol, Eurojustand the Standing Committee on Opera-tional Cooperation on Internal Security

(COSI) - in order to propose - once iden-tified the extent of the problem - appro-priate measures to enable the EU toprevent and combat these threats.Through numerous hearings, CRIM hasgathered together all different institutions,international and European organisationsas well as national investigative and judi-

cial authorities to develop an integratedand comprehensive approach to effecti-vely combat criminal systems and relatedactivities such as corruption and moneylaundering.

3. What kind of results the CRIMCommission hopes for in terms ofchanges in instruments of cooperationand European legislation?

The CRIM Commission intendsto make a number of suggestions for thecreation of legislative and operationalmeasures to combat the phenomena ob-ject of its analysis. Member States should

adopt common legal standards, startingwith a common definition of organisedcrime that includes the case of mafia as-sociation and a specification of the of-fence of self-laundering. We need aEuropean law that allows the confiscationof criminal assets - including preventiveand basic civil and criminal confiscations- also allowing their reuse for social pur-poses. There should be greater use ofnew technologies to combat the growingthreat of cyber-crime. It is necessary, inthe field of public procurement, to excludefrom public offices in all the EU those whohave been convicted for organised crime,corruption, money laundering or crimesagainst the Public Administration. Con-nections between phenomena of tax eva-sion, fraud and tax avoidance and thefinancing of the illegal activities of criminalorganisations, as well as the financialsupport given by criminal organisations toterrorist groups in some cases, should beclarified. We want greater accountabilityof political parties, specific predictions forcandidacy criteria, ineligibility and disqua-lification from elective and public office.We have requested more transparencyand cooperation on the part of the ban-king sector, with the abolition of bank se-crecy and a resolute approach towardsthe so-called tax havens, including re-sponsibility for professionals. Corruptionmust be tackled also through cutting bu-reaucratic procedure in governmentagencies; indeed corruption, in a periodof severe economic and financial crisis,diverts resources that could be devotedto considerable economic growth and es-sential services (education, health, wel-fare). We have also included the case ofmanipulation of sports event, to promotelegal games and avoid illegal betting andmatch fixing. The strengthening of policeand judicial cooperation between MemberStates and with other countries is in anycase, the basic premise to all the law en-forcement activities against the criminalphenomena described.

Meeting CRIMSpecial Committee on Organised Crime, CorruptionSpecial Committee on Organised Crime, Corruption

and Money Launderingand Money Laundering

Interview with MEP Salvatore IacolinoInterview by Anna Sergi

2ECPR Standing Group on Organised Crime

September 2013, Volume 10, Issue 3

MEP Salvatore IacolinoPhoto: eppgroup.eu

4.What kind of challenges the Com-mission is facing in terms of the inte-rests involved, obstacles andresistance on the part of the MemberStates?

There are, in my view, two typesof obstacles. On the one hand differentlegal traditions, different legal systemsand national constitutional settings makemore difficult the approximation of crimi-nal laws based on the best practices im-plemented by some Member States. Onthe other side it is not fully ac-cepted yet - even if it has beenwidely documented in thecourse of the hearings for CRIM- the idea that mafias or organi-sed crime are not unique to cer-tain geographic areas, thatcorruption not only lurks in somespecific state institutions, thatmoney laundering does not takeplace only in some contexts, butthat all these phenomena involve allMember States and undermine the liciteconomy as well as the welfare of all Eu-ropean citizens. The composition of theCRIM Commission - composed of MEPsfrom 24 different Member States - certifieshowever the interest and political will forjoint efforts to arrive at effective solutions.

5. Can you give us some examplesof the work that the Commission hasdone so far?

The CRIM Commission held 15hearings of experts: more than one hun-dred representatives of Institutions and

Agencies of the EU, the UN, the WorldBank, the Council of Europe and other or-ganisations as well as academics, the ju-diciary, police , national administratorsand civil society. Visits were carried out inBelgrade, Milan, Palermo, Rome, TheHague and Washington, where we audi-ted a total of nearly 150 authorities andexperts and held meetings with represen-tatives of the Parliamentary committeeswithin national parliaments. I was there-fore inspired by all the aforementionedcontributions, as well as inputs from fellow

MEPs duringt h e s emonths, toprepare a textthat meetsthe need thatcannot be po-stponed anylonger to ef-fectively com-bat the

phenomena of organised crime, corrup-tion and money laundering. On the 7th ofMay my interim report was approved witha large majority and with the support of allpolitical groups. In June, I submitted myfinal report that shall be voted upon in thenext CRIM hearing in September 2013 toland in Plenary in Strasbourg in October.In the recent weeks I have been negotia-ting with other political groups a list of po-sitive actions which the EuropeanCommission and the Member Statesshould prioritise in the near future, ambi-tious challenges that can be met only witheveryone's responsible effort.

3ECPR Standing Group on Organised CrimeSeptember 2013, Volume 10, Issue 3

THE ECPR SGOC

Steering Committee 2012-2017

Convenor: Felia Allum,

University of BathCo-convenor:

Francesca Longo, University of Catania

Social Media Officer: Bill Tupman, University of Exeter,

Anglia Ruskin UniversityFunding Officer:

Daniela IrreraUniversity of Catania

Events & Publication Officer:Helena Carrapico,

University of DundeeStrategic Communication:

Panos Kostakos, University of Bath

Newsletter Editors:Anna Sergi & Falko Ernst

University of EssexOnline Publication Project

Felia Allum, University of BathAnita Lavorgna, University of Trento

Yuliya Zabyelina, University of EdinburghMember

Giap PariniUniversity of Calabria

14.03.2012 EP decision on the CRIMMandate

18.04.2012 CRIM Constitutive Meeting16-18.07.2012 Delegation to Serbia

(Belgrade)28-31.10.2012 Delegation to Italy

(Milan, Rome, Palermo)11.12.2012 EP decision to extend the

CRIM Mandate11-12.02.2013 Delegation to Europol/

Eurojust (The Hague)4-5.03.2013 CRIM - DG EXPO Seminar

with Parliamentarians from the Western Bal-kans

29.04-01.05.2013 Delegation to the US(Washington D.C.)

07.05.2013 Interparliamentary Commit-tee Meeting with National Parliaments

11.06.2013 Adoption of the Mid-TermResolution on Organised Crime, Corruptionand Money Laundering by Plenary

17.09.2013 Adoption of the Final Reporton Organised Crime, Corruption and MoneyLaundering by CRIM (last CRIM meeting)

October II 2013 Expected adoption ofthe Final Resolution on Organised Crime,Corruption and Money Laundering by Ple-nary

CRIM KEY DATES

Who is Who

All documents related to the activities of theCRIM Special Committee

can be found at:

www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/crim/TOTAL MEMBERS (SEPT.2013)

“We want greater accoun-tability of political parties,

specific predictions forcandidacy criteria, ineligibi-

lity and disqualificationfrom elective and

public office”.

Fabio Licata is Judge of the CriminalDivision and Prevention Measures in Pa-lermo, Italy.

Confiscation of illegal proceeds is con-sidered at international level an indispen-sable tool against organized crime, ascriminal organizations use free market todisguise and secure the proceeds of cri-mes, as well as to produce new resourcesready to be used for financing further ille-gal activities However, terrorist and crimi-nal organizations take advantage ofglobalization and complexity of moderneconomy to disguise their criminal profitsand to distance them from the criminalacts, from which they derive, in order toavoid confiscation of proceeds even incase of criminal conviction. As a matter offact, the classic penal confiscation entailsa criminal conviction, as well as evidence,beyond any reasonable doubt, of the in-strumental link between the crime and thealleged criminal proceeds. Consequently,it is extremely difficult to fulfil such stan-dard, particularly in cases of organizedcrime and economic crimes, as it is provedby the inadequate results obtained byusing the classic criminal approach. The-refore, a new approach has been adoptedin order to rethink the patterns of the evi-dence needed to consider illicit the originof properties and assets.

Illicit activities as organized crime, ter-rorism, drug trafficking, racketeering,smuggling of goods and human beings,corruption and illicit exploiting of publicworks, normally produce huge unlawfulproceeds that are generally easily hiddenand reinvested in legal market. As a con-sequence, international treaties and seve-ral national legislations have envisagedthe idea to overcome the need of givingevidence of the direct link between the of-fence and the unjustified assets of the of-fender. The main feature of this method isthe use of extended and non-convictionbased confiscation, aimed at directly tar-get illegal revenues and assets of the al-leged offenders by using legalpresumptions, inversion of burden of proofor non-criminal standards of proof. In par-ticular, non-conviction based confiscationis a notion that allows property to be con-fiscated without the need to obtain a crimi-

nal conviction against the owner; this isdone by filing civil action against the pro-perty itself.

Jurisdictions which have introducednon-conviction based confiscation legisla-tion include: Italy, Ireland, United Kingdom,Albania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, U.S.A., Au-stralia, South Africa, the Canadian provin-ces of Alberta and Ontario. The firstinternational treaty where these goals areenshrined is the UN Convention against Il-licit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psycho-tropic Substances, adopted in Vienna in1988. In particular, article 5 of the Conven-tion recognises the need of modern toolsin order to cover the lack of efficacy of theclassic criminal law in depriving criminalorganisations of their illicit profits, by invi-ting national states to “ensuring that theonus of proof be reversed regarding thelawful origin of alleged proceeds or otherproperty liable to confiscation, to the ex-tent that such action is consistent with theprinciples of its domestic law and with thenature of the judicial and other procee-dings”. The same perspective has beenembraced by later UN treaties, like the2000 Convention against TransnationalOrganized Crime (art. 12) and the 2003Convention Against Corruption (art. 12).

At European level, the Council of Eu-rope Convention on Laundering, Search,Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceedsfrom Crime, signed in Strasbourg in 1990,obliges the States Parties to achieve uni-formity in their laws regarding the preven-

tion and suppression of money launderingand obliges them to introduce the confi-scation of the equivalent value (if it is im-possible to confiscate the proceeds).Moreover, the Action Plan to Combat Or-ganised Crime, adopted by the Council ofthe European Union, on the 27 of April1997, highlighted the importance for mem-ber states to introduce “special proceduresfor tracing, seizure if confiscation of pro-ceeds from crime” and, on 29 March 1999the European Council adopted a joint po-sition on the aforesaid Draft UN Conven-tion in which it was observed (art. 7) thatin the matter of proceeds of crime “the per-tinent provisions of the Draft Conventioncould be drawn up on the basis of theConvention against Illicit Traffic in NarcoticDrugs and Psychotropic Substances of1988” as well as “taking full account of theCouncil of Europe Convention” of 1990.Another important step in this field is re-presented by the Framework Decision ofthe Council of the European Union(2005/212/JHA of 24 February 2005 onConfiscation of crime-related proceeds, in-strumentalities and property), callingmember states for adopting models of ex-tended confiscation for crimes with prisonterms exceeding one year, requiring justthe judicial ascertainment of the crime re-lated with the assets, without requiring acriminal conviction of the defendant. Fi-nally, in terms of approved rules, it mustbe mentioned the Council Framework De-cision 2006/783/JHA of 6 October 2006 onthe application of the principle of mutualrecognition to confiscation orders. Howe-ver, according the implementation reportspublished by the EU Commission, theabove-mentioned EU legal framework hasproven to be inadequate and scarcely im-plemented.

In terms of perspective, a significantstep towards the harmonisation of Mem-ber States’ freezing and confiscation regi-mes and facilitation of mutual trust andeffective cross-border cooperation is theproposal for a directive of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council on the free-zing and confiscation of proceeds of crimein the European Union (COM(2012)0085– C7-0075/2012 – 2012/0036(COD)), cur-rently discussed before the EU Parlia-ment.

Non-conviction based Confiscation within the new EU Directive

Fabio Licata

by Hon.Judge Fabio Licata



This Directive lays down the minimumrules for Member States with respect tofreezing and confiscation of criminal as-sets through direct confiscation, valueconfiscation, extended confiscation, non-conviction based confiscation and thirdparty confiscation.

Nonetheless, the draft proposed bythe Commission differs widely from com-monly known non-conviction based con-fiscation law: Primarily as it suggestsproceedings would be conducted within acriminal law frame; secondly as it limitsthe non conviction based confiscation to

cases of death, or serious illness orescape of the defendant, implying a se-rious risk of prescription. Moreover, thirdparties confiscation would be hardly ap-plicable, as it is provided just if there isevidence that the proceeds or propertywere transferred for free or in exchangefor an amount lower than their marketvalue when the third party knew, or heshould have known, the illicit origin of thatproceeds.

In other words, the Commission’s pro-posal risks of being less effective than ex-pected and inconsistent with the Italianmodel of antimafia preventive measuresor than the Common law non-convictionbased confiscation model.

Taking into account these shortco-mings, the Committee on Civil Liberties,

Justice and Home Affairs has recentlyamended the proposed draft, reinforcingthe provisions of non-conviction basedconfiscation and extended confiscation,so as to make them more efficient in orderto actually serve the purpose of preven-ting the use of proceeds of crime for com-mitting future crimes or their reinvestmentinto licit activities. In this respect, it is pro-vided that Member States are free toadopt confiscation procedures which arelinked to a criminal case before any court,whether criminal, civil or administrative.Consequently, confiscation is possibleboth on a criminal conviction and in the

absence of such conviction.

Moreover, in case of criminal activitiessuch as organized crime or terrorism,where a criminal conviction is not pursuedor cannot be achieved, it should be pos-sible to confiscate assets, if a court is sa-tisfied, after making full use of theavailableevidence,includingthe di-spropor-tionality ofa s s e t scomparedto the de-clared in-c o m e ,that the

property derives from activities of a crimi-nal nature. On the other hand, it was pro-posed that third-party confiscation shouldalso be possible where the suspect or ac-cused person was acting for another na-tural or legal person from the outset.Finally, it is envisaged the introduction ofa crime aimed at punish the conduct offictitiously attributing ownership and avai-lability of property to third parties, with theaim of avoiding seizure or confiscationmeasures.

To sum up, it could be affirmed thatthe proposal of directive on confiscation,

as amended by the EuropeanParliament, is a fundamental toolto harmonize the European legalframework with the legal instru-ment introduced in members sta-tes as Italy and UK. Besides, thesystem is consistent with funda-mental rights.

In this regard, national and su-pranational courts several timeshave considered these non-con-viction based systems compatiblewith national constitutional requi-rements, as well as with funda-mental rights protected byEuropean Convention of HumanRights. In particular, ECHR hasconcluded that they match the re-quirements of art. 6 of the Con-vention as they are adopted by ajudicial authority, with full respect

of the rights of the defence and of bonafide third parties, and that they can bechallenged before a court. Consistentlywith this framework, the European Direc-tive has fully implemented these basic sa-feguards, envisaging a system both toughon criminal wealth and respectful ofhuman rights.


Image from www.nationofchange.org

“Non-conviction based confiscation is a notion that al-lows property to be confiscated without the need to ob-tain a criminal conviction against the owner; this is done

by filing civil action against the property itself.Jurisdictions which have introduced non-conviction

based confiscation legislation include: Italy, Ireland, Uni-ted Kingdom, Albania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, U.S.A., Au-

stralia, South Africa, the Canadian provinces of Albertaand Ontario.”

For more information check

Best Practices on Confiscation (Recommendations 4 and 38)

And a Framework for Ongoing Work on Asset Recovery

available for download at http://www.fatf-gafi.org

Joseph G. Whittle is a part-time PhDstudent and tutor London MetropolitanUniversity. After several years living inChina JG completed his MSc at Oxfordbefore joining the Civil Service where hehas worked across several state depar-tments.

In ‘The Art of War’ Sun Tzu speaks ofthe need to ‘know your enemy’ if battlefieldsuccess is to be achieved. Is there a pa-rallel here with the preparedness of UK lawenforcement to tackle aspects of transna-tional crime involving different cultures andlanguages.

Human smuggling is identified as oneof the major organised crime threats facingthe UK (Home Office 2011). However,owing to the clandestine nature of such ac-tivities and the fact they are cross-borderin nature and incorporate different nationa-lities, relatively little is known about thesegroups and how they operate. Building onongoing PhD research, this article will at-tempt, through the lens of Chinese tran-snational human smuggling networks, toidentify some of the problems faced by UKlaw enforcement in confronting the chal-lenge posed by criminal groups from diffe-rent states and cultures.

How many and who?It is estimated that there are approxi-

mately 150-200,000 people of Chinese ori-gin in the UK illegally (Wu et al, 2009).Many of these are migrants who, predomi-nantly from the coastal provinces of Fujianand Zhejiang, pay Snakehead gangs up to£30,000 to be transported via various rou-tes to the UK (Pieke and Xiang 2007). Pie-ke’s (2002) research on Chinese migratorypatterns finds that many migrants do notbelieve paying to be smuggled to the UKis illegal, and in some areas migrationforms part of a cultural tradition datingback centuries. Economic factors are alsoa key consideration. Income earnedabroad is remitted home to build largehouses to project status, and increase thesocial standing of families in Chinese so-ciety (Chu 2010). These cultural and eco-nomic ‘push’ factors are problematic forlaw enforcement and Government to

counter outside of the country of origin.

Triads? Organised Crime? Neither?In the UK media Snakeheads are va-

riously portrayed as Triads, Tongs or othersinister organised crime groups, with traf-ficking and people smuggling labels alsointerchangeably applied (Sky 2013, BBC2007, Thompson 2003). However asZhang and Chin (2008) have observed du-ring 15 years researching Chinese humansmuggling networks to the USA and inter-viewing 129 Snakeheads, there is no basisfor the supposition that Snakeheads areTriads or other “typical” organised crimegroups. Chin (1999) and Zhang (2008)suggest that the opposite is true, and thatowing to the nature of human smugglingnetworks from China, Snakeheads consi-der Triads to be ‘bad for business’, withTriads only occasionally used as ‘muscle’to collect debts or ‘police’ safe houses. Nocomparable research to date has beenconducted in the UK. However, Pieke’s(2002) exploration of Chinese migratorytrends emphatically dismisses the premisethat ‘traditional’ organised crime groupslike Triads are involved. A more realisticdescription of Snakehead gangs is offeredby Finkenauer as ‘crime that is organised’as opposed to organised crime (cited inKyle and Dale 2001). Zhang and Chin(2008) found that Snakehead gangs areclose knit and small scale horizontal net-works, rather than the elaborate hierarchi-cal groups of organised criminals, who

control human smuggling empires fromthe Far East. Snakehead gangs comprisesmall networks of people with key skills(document forger, link to corrupt borderguard, financier etc.) and each link in thechain is vital in mounting a successfulsmuggling operation (Chin 1999). Snake-heads themselves are entrepreneurial bu-sinessmen and women who have thefinances and ‘guanxi’ (social connections)to facilitate smuggling operations (Zhangand Chin 2008). Chinese Snakeheadgangs do not then fit into the stereotypical‘organised crime’ template, and this hasimplications in devising strategies to tacklethem.

Challenges for Law EnforcementIt is challenging for UK law enforce-

ment to infiltrate or understand Snakeheadgang’s dynamics and modus operandiowing to their limited size and fluid nature.Silverstone (2011) suggests that law en-forcement tends to perceive and treat cri-minal groups as mirroring their ownhierarchical structures. However Snake-head gangs are horizontal, with eachgroup member playing a specific part wi-thin the smuggling process (Zhang andChin 2008). As such law enforcement, likethe media, struggles with the concept ofSnakehead gangs being run by businessmen and women who provide a ‘commu-nity service’ (Zhang et al 2007) valued bytheir customers, rather than a ‘folk devil’like a Triad.

In an operational environment it is que-stionable how well frontline police officersare equipped to tackle different culturesand languages generally. For example,The West End Policing Team in Londonwho police Chinatown have only recentlyappointed their first ‘Chinese’ speaking(Cantonese) officer after 28 years (Perso-nal communication 2013). Frontline offi-cers without specific knowledge ofChinese culture may also miss the signifi-cance of someone in Chinatown offeringto decorate your business or home. Theseoffers relate to extortion whereby a busi-ness or homeowner is obliged to pay signi-ficant amount for a seeminglyinnocuous service (Chu 2000).

‘Know your enemy’: Reflections on challengesfaced by UK law enforcement agencies in

policing international organised crime

by Joseph Whittle

Joseph Whittle



Police also face challenges in gathe-ring effective intelligence from foreign na-tionals. Similarly if a Chinese person isstop checked by police and gives ‘Li’ astheir name it will be recorded as such. Ho-wever ‘Li’ can be translated into 30-40 dif-ferent Chinese characters with differentmeanings; the value and accuracy of theintelligence collected is then greatly dimi-nished. If this information is subsequentlyshared or used to cross reference informa-tion with Chinese authorities it is of extre-mely limited value. Sheptcycki (2004) hasidentified the problems associated with po-lice intelligence gathering and sharing.This becomes even more problematicwhen law enforcement is reliant on datathat is being shared across borders andtranslated into different languages (Laczkoand Thompson 2000).

Language and culture also appears toact as a ‘shield’ insulating some commu-nities from law enforcement responsesthat do not understand them. For exampleSilverstone (2011a) recent research ofChinese language newspapers in Lon-don’s Chinatown noted many examples ofovert illegal employment opportunities. Si-milarly he reports about illegal activity suchas cigarette selling taking place with impu-nity within Chinatown. The language andcultural limitations police face in tacklingChinese crime in the UK was furtherexemplified by Dees’ (2012) case study ofa murder within the Chinese communityand the difficulties local police, even withnational support, faced in the investigation.

An indirect challenge is placed uponlaw enforcement by Government. In re-sponse to human smuggling, Governmentrhetoric espouses the idea of internationalcooperation and collaboration to tackle ‘or-ganised crime’ (SOCA 2008, Home Office2011). This rhetoric is unhelpful for tworeasons. Firstly, it attaches the label of ‘or-ganised crime’ to an activity which, as de-scribed above, does not seem to fit withstandard organised crime frameworks andis not even considered criminal by thosesmuggled. Secondly, phrases such ascooperation and collaboration assume ac-tive cooperation from foreign gover-nments. As Zhang points out, this is notnecessarily forthcoming in relation toChina:

‘…the Chinese government…faces fargreater social and political challenges thanthis benign irritant that at worst can onlycause occasional embarrassment’ (2008,p.218)

Next stepsWhile the above provides only a brief

overview of one aspect (Chinese Snake-heads) of a much more complex and broa-

der issue, it does draw attention to someof the challenges UK law enforcementface in ‘knowing their enemy’.

Foreign Secretary William Hague re-cently highlighted the ‘threat’ posed to Bri-tain’s diplomatic position by the lack of UKstudents learning foreign languages (Bof-fey 2013). This ‘threat’ is also applicable toUK law enforcement in which a lack of lan-guage skills and cultural understandingprovides a shield for criminal elementsfrom the law. The importance of linguisticand cultural knowledge was highlighted re-cently in a multi-national policing operationon the streets of the UK. Operation Triviuminvolved officers from Poland, Lithuaniaand Romania patrolling with British coun-terparts to overcome the language andcultural barriers police face (WarwickshirePolice 2013). Increasing recruitment ofthose skilled in relevant foreign languagescould greatly assist law enforcement in for-mulating more effective responses andgaining intelligence from communities.

In the context of Snakeheads andhuman smuggling from China, UK law en-forcement is yet to understand organisa-tional dynamics or overcome cultural andlanguage challenges. Empirical researchregarding Snakeheads and their facilitationof human smuggling from China to the UKis required to evidence who Snakeheadsare, and how they operate. Exploringthese operations and the steps law enfor-cement needs to take tackle the problemeffectively are aims of my 2014 fieldwork.

References:

BBC (not attributed) (2007)http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7

039952.stmBoffey D (2013) Lack of language skills is

diminishing Britain’s voice in the world. The Ob-server. London

Chu J (2010) Cosmologies of Credit: Tran-snational Mobility and the Politics of DestinationChina Durham and London, Duke UniversityPress.

Chu Y K (2000) The Triads as Business,London, Routledge.

Chin K L (1999) Smuggled Chinese: clan-destine immigration to the United States: Phila-delphia, Temple University Press.

Dees J (2012) Claws of the Dragon: Chi-nese Organised Crime in the UK: Papers fromthe British Criminology Conference. BritishJournal of Criminology. 12 61-78

Home Office (2011) Local to Global: Redu-cing the Risk from Organised Crime London,Home Office.

Kyle D and Koslowski R (eds) (2001) GlobalHuman Smuggling: comparative perspectives.Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press

Laczko F and Thompson D (eds) (2000) Mi-grant Trafficking and Human Smuggling in Eu-rope: A review of the evidence with case studies

from Hungary, Poland and Ukraine Geneva, In-ternational Organisation for Migration.

Morselli C Turcotte M and Tenti V (2011)The mobility of criminal groups: Global Crime,12(3), 165-188.

Personal communication (2013) Interviewwith Metropolitan police officer based in We-stminster.

Pieke F.and Mallee H (eds) (1999) Internaland International Migration: Chinese Perspecti-ves. Richmond, Surrey Curzon.

Pieke F (2002) Recent Trends in ChineseMigration to Europe: Fujianese Migration in Per-spective. IOM migration research series no.6.Geneva, International Organisation for Migra-tion.

Pieke. F and Xiang.B (2007) Legality andLabour: Chinese Migration, Neoliberalism andthe State in the UK and China. COMPAS wor-king papers No. 56 Oxford University, Centre forMigration Policy and Study.

Serious Organised Crime Agency (2008)Annual Report 2008 – 09

http://www.soca.gov.uk/about-soca/librarySheptcycki J (2004) Organizational Patho-

logies in Police Intelligence Systems: SomeContributions to the Lexicon of Intelligence-ledPolicing: European Journal of Criminology 1(3)307 – 332.

Silverstone D (2011) A response to MorselliC Turcotte M and Tenti V (2010) The Mobility ofCriminal Groups, Global Crime 12(3) 189-206.

Silverstone D (2011a) From Triads to sna-keheads: organized crime and

illegal migration within Britain's Chinesecommunity. Global Crime 12(2) 93-111.

Sky (not attributed) (2013) Chinese HumanTrafficking Bust in Europe Sky News

http://news.sky.com/story/1126984/chinese-human-trafficking-ring-bust-in-europe

Thompson T (2003) Snakehead empresswho made millions trafficking in misery: Guar-dian Newspaper

http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/jul/06/immigration.china

Tzu Sun The Art of War http://www.guten-berg.org/catalog/world/readfile?fk_files=3273567

Warwickshire Police (not attributed) (2013)http://onlinenews.warwickshire.police.uk/wp

news_pressrelease/police-forces-tackle-fo-reign-national-criminals-on-our-roads/15480

Wu B, Guo L and Sheehan J (2010) Em-ployment Conditions of Chinese Migrant Wor-kers in the East Midlands: A Pilot Study in aContext of Economic Recession. Draft consul-tation paper, University of Nottingham ChinaPolicy Institute, School of Contemporary Chi-nese Studies.

Zhang. S. (2008) Chinese human smug-gling organizations : families, social networks,and cultural imperatives: Stanford, California:Stanford University Press

Zhang S and Chin K (2008): Snakeheads,mules and protective umbrellas: a review of cur-rent research on Chinese organised crime:Crime Law Social Change 50 177 – 195.

Zhang S Chin K L and Miller J (2007) Wo-men’s participation in Chinese transnationalhuman smuggling: a gendered market perspec-tive Criminology 45(3) 699 – 733.


Nicholas Gilmour works as an inter-national law enforcement adviser. After 10years as an aircraft electrician, Nicholasjoined the Lancashire Constabulary be-fore moving to New Zealand to join theNew Zealand Police. After retuning to theUK in 2008, Nicholas worked for the Na-tional Policing Improvement Agency (nowNational Police College) writing practiceadvice for the UK’s 43 police forces.

As a method through which to transfervalue, the purchasing of high value por-table commodities is perhaps centuriesold, refined through the historic move-ment of populations seeking to protect in-dividual wealth and avoid payingcompulsory taxes. Today, however, thepurchasing of high value portable com-modities also represents a distinctive me-thod of money laundering, brieflydescribed within popular typological ap-praisals and identified in the U.K. as re-presenting a significant concern to lawenforcement (IMF, 2011).

High value portable commodities Recent increases in techniques, the

scope and the abuse of previously un-chartered activities have, in combinationwith the aggregate enormity of AML prac-tices, demonstrated the striving of orga-nised crime to incessantly seek out new,less visible opportunities to legitimise we-alth (Rider, 2006). In this context, highvalue portable commodities have gainedimportance. Arguably, the augmentinguse of the latter has emanated from thevalue of certain commodities and the pos-sibility to utilize everyday consumer pur-chasing practices as a cover. Researchundertaken in the U.K. by the author du-ring 2012 and early 2013 identified howsurges in popularity and consumer buyinghabits similarly added to the scope ofcommodities exploitable for money laun-dering. While the study identified as themost susceptible high value portablecommodities gold, diamonds, jewelleryand artwork, law enforcement and AMLprofessionals acknowledged that thescope of applicable commodities remai-ned constrained only by criminal imagina-

tion.

VulnerabilitiesThe success of money laundering

through the purchasing of high value por-table commodities relies on many varia-bles. The latter include the aptitude of themoney launderer, the location and impor-tantly the predicate crime generating theillicit funds. Examination of research datacollected by the author through interviewswith AML professionals across nine sec-tors determined how the four most popu-lar high value portable commoditiesexposed several characteristics that di-rectly coincided with opportunities to faci-litate this approach while complying withthe basic necessities of the criminals in-volved: efficiency, discretion, profitabilityand evasion of AML controls. Gold, dia-monds, jewellery and artwork surfaced askey high value portable commodities asthey are:

• Easily purchased – Opportuni-ties to purchase these items exist exten-sively throughout the U.K., essentiallyallowing criminals to spread the risk of su-spicion and thus detection. Many busi-nesses selling such items haveprocedures that by their very nature ena-ble purchases to remain simple as well asdeficient of adequate regulatory obliga-tions. The possibility to purchase highvalue portable commodities in cash sup-ports anonymity. Similarly, business ow-

ners are unlikely to reject customers asthey rely on profit to ensure survival.

• Easily transported – An array ofhigh value commodities are frequentlysimple to disguise. The convenience ofusing ‘mules’ to minimise transportationrisks can lead to the prioritization of cer-tain commodities. However, a lack of in-spection capabilities and requestsrelating to proof of purchase present si-tuational factors (Tilley, 2012) that enableunassuming passage. The capacity inwhich to transfer high value portable com-modities and the ease in which transpor-tation can be arranged is furthersupported by the modest understandingof susceptible routes of passage, the me-thods and techniques used to concealitems and the overall knowledge neces-sary to identify the money laundering pro-cess. Emphasis on this susceptibility isapparent in the lack of control surroun-ding jewellery, watches and further itemsfrequentlz worn by travellers.

• Undefined – This feature notonly implies commodities are chosen be-cause they are capable of secretion butalso because they are difficult to validate.The absence of specialised law enforce-ment resources alongside insufficientAML expertise and knowledge concer-ning particular methods of money launde-ring implies that certain items may appearto less valuable than is actually the caseand fail to be recognised as money laun-dering items.

• Easily sold – While smaller com-modities can hold the greatest value, incontrast art work and antiques and theongoing obsession with wildlife productssuggests items are in fact chosen for theirresale value, both in licit as well as illicitmarkets. As such, easily sold items acce-lerate money laundering, further limitingopportunities for the tracing of once illicitfunds back to the predicate offence.

The four above outlined factors hi-ghlight vulnerabilities of existing practicesaimed at reducing the profitability of orga-nised crime and prevent money launde-ring in the U.K. and Europe. Moreimportantly, these vulnerabilities under-line the durability in purchasing high value

Endless opportunities.Money-laundering through high value

portable commoditiesby Nicholas Gilmour

Nicholas Gilmour



portable commodities for money laun-dering purposes. Notwithstanding the va-rious shapes this particular process cantake, key vulnerabilities also persistacross the scope of money launderedthrough the purchasing of high value por-table commodities. From evidence consi-dering why criminals choose thisparticular modus operandi, it has beenpossible to determine from the researchdata collected by this author that this me-thod of money laundering further charac-terises a process that:

• Enables direct control over theentire money laundering process, despiteseveral variables existing specifically du-ring transportation and at the point ofsale;

• Requires little effort by the crimi-nal/money launderer;

• Requires items that tend not toattract attention, typically assisted by thecareful selection of particular locations,points of sale, transport routes, and/or thepersons involved;

• Represents normality in manycases as purchases of such commoditiestake place on a regular basis withoutpressure on many sellers to raise unne-cessary suspicion to regulatory authori-ties.

Opportunities for preventionHigh value portable commodities will

continue to provide unique opportunitiesthrough which to launder illicit funds. Ho-wever, this method offers many optionsfor introducing preventative measures

based merely on its simplistic nature. Assuch, a ‘script theoretic approach’ (Cor-nish 1994, p. 160) can help to provide theherefore needed knowledge, identifyingspecific procedural aspects of a specificcrime. This approach can help to limitcrime facilitators needed for success atvarious stages of the money launderingprocess.

Responsibility for preventative actionis, however, perhaps the most difficultaspect to resolve. With preventative guar-dianship for this method remaining wide-spread, those agencies through which theprocess of money laundering passes cle-arly hold the most critical obligations. Ac-cording to data collected by this author,such obligations involve enforcing a limiton ‘cash only’ purchases, exercising strictdue diligence associated with customerpurchases, increasing suspicious activityreports to be submitted by high valuecommodity dealers, introducing a code ofethics and increasing knowledge and un-derstanding by customs and border offi-cials through which such commodities. Afurther option also identified during rese-arch includes the active encouragementof electronic means of payment for highvalue portable commodities, thus increa-sing the traceability of transactions.

If applied appropriately, collaborationin form of information sharing and theadoption of comparative strategies bet-ween answerable entities in the U.K. aswell as overseas can occupy a crucialrole. Furthermore, collaboration is consi-

dered essential in supporting efforts to mi-nimalise the cost associated with the im-plementation of preventative measuresas well as limiting disinterest caused byan inadequate return on investment, par-ticularly for those within the public sector.However, like most preventative measu-res, sufficient collaboration must includeentire sectors through which criminal ac-tivities, such as money laundering, takeplace, thus guaranteeing sufficient mani-pulation of the entire money launderingenvironment while enabling the diffusionof preventative benefits laterally in form ofother methods of money laundering.

References• Cornish, D. (1994). The proce-

dural analysis of offending and its rele-vance for situational prevention. In:Clarke RV (ed.). Crime Prevention Stu-dies, Vol. 3. Monsey, NY: Criminal JusticePress pp. 151-196.

• IMF. (2011). United Kingdom:Anti-Money Laundering/Combating theFinancing of Terrorism Technical Note. In-ternational Monetary Fund. Retrieved Au-gust 12th, 2013, from website:http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2011/cr11231.pdf

• Rider, B. A. K. (2006). The priceof laundering dirty money”, private paper,Jesus College, University of Cambridge,Cambridge.

• Tilley, N. (2012). Crime Reduc-tion: Responsibility, Regulation, and Re-search. Criminology & Public Policy. Vol11 (2), pp. 361–378



September 2013, Volume 10, Issue 310ECPR Standing Group on Organised Crime


For more information and registration: https://www.regonline.co.uk/custImages/290000/293138/PoliceFoundation2013latestbrochure.pdf

Policing Organised CrimeChanging landscape, changing practice

Tuesday 5 November 2013BT Auditorium andCustomer Showcase, London

CHAIRThe Lord Dear QPM DL

SPEAKERS INCLUDE

Keith Bristow QPMDirector General, National Crime Agency

Gregor McGillHead of Organised Crime Division, Crown Prosecution Service

Professor Michael LeviProfessor of Criminology, University of Cardiff

Martin HewittDeputy Assistant Commissioner, Crime Operations, Metropolitan Police Service

About the conference

Concern about serious organised crime,which is costly, harmful and widespread, is ri-sing. The internet offers attractive new oppor-tunities for committing crime, rising commodityprices and the increasing mobility of popula-tions offer new sources of illicit income, andeven the recession is being exploited as loansharks take advantage of those in debt androgue landlords exploit vulnerable tenants.

Despite this, organised crime is less of apriority for the police and their partners at thelocal level than it is at a national level. Cuts topolice funding and the introduction of Policeand Crime Commissioners (PCCs) are only li-kely to further reduce the resources availableto tackle organised crime.

Within this context, the conference will ask:• What should the police be doing to

protect the victims of organised crime in theirforce area?

• How can they work better with theirpartners, including national organisations suchas Action Fraud and the Child Exploitation andOnline Protection Centre?

• What role should PCCs play in thefight against organised crime?

• What impact will the National CrimeAgency have on organised crime and how willit work with Chief Constables and PCCs?

The conference will focus on the local ra-ther than national and on the practical. It pro-vides a unique opportunity for the policeservice and its partners to listen to some of theleading experts in the field, to contribute to di-scussions on some of the most challenging is-sues organised crime raises and to sharesome practical ways of tackling one of the big-gest threats to society.

Who should attend?

The conference will bring together seniorpolice officers, Police and Crime Commissio-ners, government policy makers, nationalagency specialists, representatives from theprivate and the third sector and academics.

What previous conference delegates havesaid:

“Events like this are really useful to pauseand recalibrate before tackling the challengesof the future” Charlie Hall, Assistant Chief Con-stable, Norfolk Constabulary

“The content was completely ‘here andnow’ but pushed boundaries of current thinkingfar and wide” Nick Parker, Managing Director,Nicholas Parker Limited

“A great conference with quality speakerswho can challenge your thinking in lots ofways” Chief Superintendent Irene Curtis, Pre-sident, Police Superintendents’ Association ofEngland and Wales

“This was an excellent conference thatprompted me to think about aspects of policingthat I would not have considered otherwise. Aday well spent!” Chief Superintendent TimJackson, Past National Deputy Secretary, Po-lice Superintendents’ Association of Englandand Wales.

“Excellent content, and excellent venueand networking opportunities” Martyn Under-hill, Police and Crime Commissioner for Dor-set

The venue

BT Auditorium and Customer Showcase,London

BT Centre, 81 Newgate Street, LondonEC1A 7AJ

Complimentary drinks and buffet receptionat the BT Tower

A complimentarynetworking anddrinks reception willbe open to the first 40people who registerfor the conference.

The event will beheld on Monday 4November, the nightbefore the confe-rence, in the stunning

BT Tower Revolving Restaurant, 60 ClevelandStreet, London W1T 4JZ.

This venue is not normally open to the pu-blic and places are limited. Book now to avoiddisappointment.


THE SGOC WEL-COMES

THE INTERNATIONAL ADVISORS

The Group is particularly happy to welcome our International Advisorswhose role will be mainly one of guidance of the Group’s activities. The Com-


May 2013, Volume 10, Issue 211ECPR Standing Group on Organised CrimeSeptember 2013, Volume 10, Issue 3

Research Institute for

European and American Studies

http://www.rieas.gr/

The 15th Cross-border CrimeColloquium will be hosted by

the Criminal Policy ResearchCentre in Sarajevo, Bosnia and Her-zegovina on 25 -27 May 2014

Economic and OrganisedCross-Border Crime in Times ofCrisis

- Legal entities and organisedcrime

- Mobility, offending and exploi-tation

- Austerity and law enforcement- Criminal wealth untapped- Old and new forms of crime-for-

profit Integrity and corruption

For information, please contact Dr. Almir Maljevic :

[email protected]. Dr. Petrus C. van Duyne:

[email protected]

Participation in the Colloquium isfree of charge. The hosting institu-tion, the Criminal Policy ResearchCentre, invites contributors presen-ting a paper to the welcome dinnerat the eve of the event and offersthem accommodation (bed & break-fast) for two nights. Lunch and refre-shments will be provided to allattendees during the two conferencedays. Travel expenses have to bepaid for by the participants. Partici-pants are invited to submit an ab-stract before 25 October 2013 to thecoordinators mentioned above.

CROSS-BORDERCRIME

COLLOQUIUM

CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

The ECPR Standing Group on Organised Crime is launching a new editorial project:

The European Review of Organised Crime

We welcome theoretical and empirical contributions presenting the latest research on organised crime broadly conceived from a variety of di-sciplines, such as criminology, criminal justice, political science, law, security studies, sociology, gender studies, economics, media studies, an-thropology, and history. We also seek contributions from practitioners who can share knowledge about organised crime by drawing upon theiron-the-ground experience.

We are now collecting papers for the Review’s inaugural issue. The deadline for the submission of manuscripts is November, 25. However,

authors are strongly encouraged to express interest and send abstracts of potential contributions to the editors by October, 18.

For further information, please contact [email protected]

or visit our webpage (http://www.sgocnet.org/index.php/the-european-review-of-organised-crime).



John Jay College of Criminal Justiceof the City University of New York, in col-laboration with the Center for SecurityStudies (KEMEA) at the Greek Ministry ofPublic Order and Citizen Protection, willhost its 11th Biennial International Confe-rence in Athens, Greece, from June 11 toJune 14, 2014. The theme of the confe-rence is The Rule of Law in an Era ofChange: Security, Social Justice and In-clusive Governance.

The array of political, social and eco-nomic transformations before us posescritical challenges to individual and collec-tive welfare. While a consensus has yetto emerge from the ongoing global deba-tes on how to address these challenges,there is a growing realization that our col-lective responses must be guided by therule of law. The many controversies sur-rounding the rule of law’s content, reachand use notwithstanding, it does consti-tute, as a recent United Nations resolu-tion noted, the basis “on which just andfair societies are built.” In the context ofthe severe social and economic stresscurrently experienced by many societies,it is imperative to reaffirm the importanceof accountability for all to fair and equita-ble laws, and entitlement for all to equalprotection of the law, so as to ensure in-clusive social orders and enhance theprospects for social justice. This confe-rence will provide an interdisciplinaryforum for scholars, government officials,representatives of intergovernmental andnon-governmental organizations, and

civic leaders to critically discuss currentrule of law-related research, policies andpractices, explore ways of strengtheningthe rule of law in all forms of governance,and engage with pressing demands forsocial justice. It is the expectation of theorganizers that several publications(books and/or special issues of scholarlyjournals) will result from the conference.

Proposals for papers may address abroad range of issues including, but notlimited, to:

Philosophical perspectives on the ruleof law

Gender-based approaches to the ruleof law

International law enforcement coope-ration

Transitional justice and its challengesTraining of law enforcement and judi-

cial officersPost-conflict peace building in divided

societiesSubstantive and procedural aspects

of criminal justice systemsInternational crimes and tribunalsInternational human rights and inter-

national humanitarian lawPlural legal ordersMigration and border securityTerrorism and counter-terrorismComparative perspectives on the ad-

judication and reintegration of offendersTransnational organized crime and

criminal networks

International and comparative per-spectives on juvenile justice

Capital punishmentNGOs, social movements and the

quest for social justiceCritical race theoryLiterary representations of justice and

the rule of lawThe body and the rule of lawPsychology, mental health and public

policyPrivatization of state functions and its

legal/social/ economic implicationsCorruptionNon-traditional threats and social

orderEnvironmental justiceInternational financial institutions and

accountability

Paper and panel proposals that ad-dress these and other issues are wel-come from all disciplines in the socialsciences, humanities and natural scien-ces.

Please submit your paper abstracthere

http://johnjay.jjay.cuny.edu/ic_greece/abstracts.asp

(500 word limit) or panel proposal(750 word limit) by

October 31, 2013.

For more information about the confe-rence please visit www.jjay.cuny.edu/ic orsend an email to [email protected]

ECPR Standing Group on Organised Crime

For the newsletter we are looking for shortoriginal articles (1000-2000 words) on differentorganised crime-related themes. These contri-butions can stem from yur ongoing researchor from summaries of published material, whichyou might wish to circulate among the organi-sed crime research community.

You may also contribute to the content of thenewsletter by sending us any announcement ofconferences/ workshops/ literature referencesyou feel could be of interest to this field.

CONTRIBUTIONS!

You are also invited topropose things that couldimprove the quality of thenewsletter.

Please send your sugge-stions and articles to:

[email protected]@essex.ac.uk

SUGGESTIONS!

The Next Issue of the ECPRStanding Group on Organised

Crime Newsletter will be available

at the end of January 2013.

The deadline for articles andcontributions

is 07 January 2013.

Visit the SGOC Website at: www.sgocnet.org

Visit the SGOC blog at: http://sgoc.blogspot.co.uk

Join Our Facebook Group Page..our Like us on Facebook!And we are also on LinkedIn and Twitter @ecpr_sgoc!

DO NOT MISS...all the content from this and previous newesletters, and info on theauthors, will be uploaded on the new website www.sgocnet.org

http://www.sgocnet.org/



standing group on organised crime: newsletter, sept. 2013, volume 10, issue 3

Documents