This article is devoted to the analysis of the FATF Recommendations related to the seizure and confiscation of property obtained by criminal means, which are mandatory for implementation in national legislation. The article discusses individual FATF recommendations, their inherent features and features of foreign countries in this area.
Summary table of country results in mutual evaluation//https://www.fatf-gafi.org/publications/mutualevaluations/?hf=10&b=0&s=desc(fatf_releasedate;
Report of the Mutual Evaluation of the Republic of Belarus. EAG. 2019// https://eurasiangroup.org;
Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus 275-Z of 07/09/1999// https://kodeksy-b;y.com;
Report of the Mutual Evaluation of the Russian Federation. ITMCFM. 2019// https://www.mumcfm.ru;
"Criminal Code of the Russian Federation" dated 06/13/1996 N 63-FZ (as amended on 04/05/2021, as amended on 04/08/2021)//http://www.consultant.ru;
Federal Law of the Russian Federation "On operational-search activity" of 12.08.1995 N 144-FZ (last edition)// http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_7519;
Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation of December 18, 2001 N 174-FZ (as amended on April 30, 2021, as amended on May 13, 2021) // http://www.consultant.ru/document/Cons_doc_LAW_34481
Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Belarus dated July 16, 1999 No. 295-Z// https://kodeksy.by/ugolovno-processualnyy-kodeks
See Australia Peer Review Report. 2015 Unofficial translation// https://www.mumcfm.ru/biblioteka/mezdunarodnye-dokumenty/otcety-o-vzaimnyh-ocenkah;
Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 No. 85, 2002 (Australian Proceeds of Crime Act
You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.