CONFISCATION OF ASSETS WITHOUT CONVICTION: CIVIL MECHANISM OR QUASI-CRIMINAL LIABILITY?

Abstract

The methodological basis of the research includes general scientific and special legal methods: dialectical, formal-legal, systemic-structural, comparative-legal, as well as the method of analyzing the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. The application of these methods made it possible to examine the legal nature of sanction-based confiscation, identify its substantive features, and correlate them with international human rights standards.

The article establishes that sanction-based confiscation of assets without a conviction is a newly emerging legal institution formed at the intersection of public and private law and characterized by a mixed nature. It is implemented outside criminal proceedings; however, in terms of its consequences, it approaches criminal sanctions, which allows it to be classified as a quasi-criminal measure. It is proven that the application of this institution entails risks of violating constitutional guarantees of property rights and the presumption of innocence, as well as the standards of the European Court of Human Rights regarding fair trial guarantees. The practice of the High Anti-Corruption Court and selected international cases are analyzed, confirming a trend toward the expanded use of sanction mechanisms in response to threats to national security. Issues of evidentiary standards are identified, particularly the difference between the criminal standard of “beyond reasonable doubt” and the civil standard of “balance of probabilities,” which affects the level of procedural safeguards for individuals’ rights.

It is substantiated that sanction-based confiscation cannot be attributed exclusively to either criminal or civil law, as it combines elements of both branches and functions as a sui generis institution. Its application requires enhanced procedural safeguards, clear judicial control, and harmonization with the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights. Directions for improving legal regulation are proposed, including clarification of the legal nature of the institution, introduction of a heightened standard of proof, unification of judicial practice, and ensuring transparency in the use of confiscated assets. The implementation of these measures will ensure a balance between national security interests and the protection of fundamental human rights.