[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":325},["ShallowReactive",2],{"news-qa-why-safeguarding-is-mission-critical-to-our-anti-corruption-work-2962":3,"news-qa-why-safeguarding-is-mission-critical-to-our-anti-corruption-work-2962-similar":76,"i-heroicons:arrow-left-20-solid":320},[4],{"id":5,"status":6,"date_created":7,"date_updated":8,"title":9,"type":10,"body":11,"date":12,"topic":13,"slug":15,"activity":16,"nid":18,"topics":19,"activities":20,"programme":21,"area":21,"websites":21,"language":22,"image":23,"translation_of":21,"countries":34,"tags":35,"authors":36,"images":73,"translations":74,"content":75},10619,"published","2026-06-04T21:13:48.000Z","2026-06-05T19:01:19.000Z","Q&A: Why safeguarding is mission-critical to our anti-corruption work","Blog","_Teresa Paonessa talks with Anna Peyre about what \"safeguarding\" means in practice and why it is fundamental to credible, trusted and effective anti-corruption work. Teresa is Team Lead for Human Resources and the Basel Institute’s Safeguarding Officer; Anna Peyre is Human Resources Specialist and is helping to advance efforts around gender, equality, diversity and inclusion at the Institute._\n\n### Anna Peyre: Safeguarding is often seen as a compliance exercise – so why do we treat it as mission-critical?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: Safeguarding means ensuring that no one is harmed through our work. This includes preventing abuse, harassment, sexual exploitation, discrimination or neglect of staff, partners, beneficiaries and host communities. More broadly, it is about addressing any abuse of power, the exploitation of vulnerability and otherwise unsafe or hostile environments.\n\nFor me, safeguarding is more than following rules. In anti-corruption work, trust is essential. People must feel safe sharing information with us. If they don’t, our credibility and impact are at risk. We often operate in sensitive environments and hold significant influence through our expertise, so safeguarding is crucial to ensure this influence is used responsibly.\n\nBy creating a safe, ethical environment, we build the trust that makes our work effective and meaningful.\n\n### When does anti-corruption work itself create safeguarding risks?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: Our work involves close interaction with people across countries. We provide training, mentoring and advisory support – activities that can create situations of power imbalance. For example, training participants may feel dependent on our expertise and may hesitate to speak up. Travel and fieldwork can also involve less structured environments where boundaries are unclear.\n\nGiven our globally dispersed teams, we need to stay aware of these dynamics. Safeguarding means recognising risks early and taking steps to reduce them, even in routine situations.\n\n### What does safeguarding look like on a \"normal\" day in our work?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: It’s reflected in small, consistent actions: in the way we communicate, work with and treat one another, and in our awareness of our role, influence and responsibilities.\n\nIn practice, this means creating a respectful, open atmosphere in meetings and trainings where everyone feels able to contribute. It’s about being attentive to colleagues’ or participants’ responses, noticing changes in behaviour and checking in if something feels off.\n\nSafeguarding also involves ensuring that concerns – no matter how small – can be raised openly and without fear of judgement or retaliation.\n\nUltimately, safeguarding is about building trust over time. Consistent, respectful behaviour creates an environment where people feel safe and confident they will receive support if needed.\n\n### How do safeguarding standards translate across different cultural and legal contexts?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: We work in many different countries and are aware that cultural norms and working practices vary. However, respect, safety and appropriate behaviour apply everywhere, regardless of cultural or legal differences and local context.\n\nWe communicate these standards clearly, with sensitivity to local environments to ensure they are understood and taken seriously.\n\n### Can you share an example of how safeguarding has made a real difference – and what a \"safe\" organisation feels like in practice?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: A moment that stayed with me was after the conclusion of a safeguarding case. The reporting person told me they felt heard and valued throughout the investigation. I couldn’t ask for better feedback. It shows that the way we handle concerns really matters.\n\nIn my view, a psychologically safe organisation is one where concerns are raised openly and regularly. Raising an issue shouldn’t feel intimidating. My role is not to reduce the number of reports but to lower the barriers so people feel free to come forward and confident their concerns will be handled with care, fairness and respect.\n\n### What does meaningful safeguarding implementation require in practice?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: Meaningful safeguarding is an ongoing commitment. It requires constant visibility: people must hear about it, see it and experience it regularly.\n\nIt starts at the top. Leadership must demonstrate that safeguarding is a genuine priority, not a tick-box exercise. Ultimately, all staff need to understand what safeguarding means for their role, and what to do if an incident arises. This is why regular training and open communication are essential.\n\nFurthermore, trusted reporting channels are critical to ensure people feel safe to speak up. Organisations must also learn from past experiences and continuously improve.\n\nIn short, safeguarding works best when it’s visible, lived and constantly evolving.\n\n### What would you say to someone hesitant to report a concern?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: It’s understandable to feel hesitant. People may worry their issue isn’t “serious enough” or fear consequences. The truth is, you don’t need to be certain that something is wrong. If something feels uncomfortable, that’s a valid reason to speak up.\n\nAs Safeguarding Officer, I am bound by the highest degree of confidentiality. Anyone raising a concern – whether openly by email or anonymously through our whistleblowing hotline – can be assured their privacy will be fully protected.\n\n### If there’s one thing we want people to understand about safeguarding at the Basel Institute, what is it?\n\nTeresa Paonessa: Safeguarding is integral to everything we do. When people feel protected, we not only prevent harm but also strengthen the integrity, credibility and impact of our anti-corruption work.","2026-05-07",[14],"","qa-why-safeguarding-is-mission-critical-to-our-anti-corruption-work-2962",[17],"Insights",2962,[],[17],null,"English",{"id":24,"storage":25,"filename_disk":26,"filename_download":27,"title":28,"type":29,"created_on":7,"modified_on":7,"charset":21,"filesize":30,"width":31,"height":32,"duration":21,"embed":21,"description":21,"location":21,"tags":21,"metadata":33,"focal_point_x":21,"focal_point_y":21,"tus_id":21,"tus_data":21,"uploaded_on":7},"a37673fd-758d-44e9-bc1e-6a2056103405","local","a37673fd-758d-44e9-bc1e-6a2056103405.webp","tmp.webp","Q&A: Why safeguarding is mission-critical to our anti-corruption work","image\u002Fwebp",56992,800,533,{},[],[],[37,57],{"id":38,"news_id":39,"authors_id":53},1375,{"id":5,"status":6,"user_created":40,"date_created":7,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":8,"title":9,"type":10,"body":11,"image":24,"date":12,"topic":42,"slug":15,"activity":43,"nid":18,"topics":44,"activities":45,"programme":21,"area":21,"websites":21,"translation_of":21,"language":22,"countries":46,"tags":47,"authors":48,"images":50,"translations":51,"content":52},"03bebfd8-0b40-4a2a-820d-b9d9c13b9de6","3d9ff205-1640-4f34-b5b6-86977f51bbd6",[14],[17],[],[17],[],[],[38,49],1376,[],[],[],{"id":54,"name":55,"position":21,"image":56},594,"Anna Peyre","6c1989f9-9f2b-4d6c-b63b-def9586a5501",{"id":49,"news_id":58,"authors_id":69},{"id":5,"status":6,"user_created":40,"date_created":7,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":8,"title":9,"type":10,"body":11,"image":24,"date":12,"topic":59,"slug":15,"activity":60,"nid":18,"topics":61,"activities":62,"programme":21,"area":21,"websites":21,"translation_of":21,"language":22,"countries":63,"tags":64,"authors":65,"images":66,"translations":67,"content":68},[14],[17],[],[17],[],[],[38,49],[],[],[],{"id":70,"name":71,"position":21,"image":72},595,"Teresa Paonessa","ba3bcc92-31ec-4367-9d02-0b95109c6684",[],[],[],[77,106,132,163,185,208,232,257,299],{"id":78,"body":79,"status":6,"type":10,"date":80,"slug":81,"title":82,"image":83,"countries":84,"topic":85,"activity":88,"tags":92,"nid":93,"topics":94,"activities":96,"authors":97,"images":98,"websites":99,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":21,"translations":101,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":102,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":103,"content":104,"link":105},9871,"The third meeting of the [International Academy of Financial Crime Litigators](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.financialcrimelitigators.org\u002F) in Basel this March brought together some of the world’s top academic and litigation professionals in the field of financial crime.\n\nThe Academy was established in 2018 by [Stéphane Bonifassi](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.linkedin.com\u002Fin\u002Fst%C3%A9phane-bonifassi\u002F) of Bonifassi Avocats (Paris), [Lincoln Caylor](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.linkedin.com\u002Fin\u002Fcaylorlincoln\u002F) of Bennett Jones (Toronto) and [Elizabeth Ortega](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.linkedin.com\u002Fin\u002Fecortega\u002F) of ECO Strategic Communications (Miami).\n\nHow and why did this high-level group come about? Elizabeth Ortega explains in this quick Q&A:\n\n### Why was it necessary to launch The Academy?\n\nThe Academy was founded in 2018 in direct response to the large number of financial crime matters being handled out of court and the clear need to unite litigation professionals with academic theorists. The Basel Institute on Governance is a crucial collaborator. The Academy’s mandate is to drive international cooperation in the interest of both the victim and the accused and to develop skills and best practices for application in this highly specialised field.\n\n### Who are its members?\n\nProfessionals at the top of their game. Membership is by invitation only, extended to litigation professionals with over 20 years of experience, to professors in relevant disciplines, and to advocates for one and all.\n\nWhy bring both sides, victims and the accused, to the table?\n\nThis is the best way to promote the open exchange of ideas and information. There’s an inherent, beneficial tension in differing opinions, applications and overall goals. This forum for discussion informs practitioners and academics as they wrestle intellectually to a draw: The Academy, where theory meets practice.\n\n### How does this vision unfold at meetings?\n\nAbout twice a year, we meet for a full day in a university setting. We want to absorb the full experience of collegiality and openness to learning, debating and honing opinions. For example, at our most recent meeting at the Basel Institute, [Professor Mark Pieth](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.pieth.ch\u002F) stirred up interest by speaking on how to start cleaning \"dirty gold\". He listed findings from his extensive investigations in Peru together with analysis of compliance levels of major gold refineries and high-end jewellery retailers. \n\n[Litigator Fred Davis](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.debevoise.com\u002Ffrederickdavis) led a lively and interactive discussion on nations’ various professional rules that apply to lawyers conducting cross-border criminal investigations. He linked them to the ultimate impacts on investigations and defence. His probing questions inspired a discussion topic for our next meeting at New York University School of Law: Does a corporation have the right to defend itself? \n\n[Professor Bruce Zagaris](http:\u002F\u002Fbcr.tv\u002Fattorney\u002Fbruce-zagaris) spoke on the revival of the United States’ disclosure statute, Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), pertaining to lobbying regulation.\n\n[Gretta Fenner](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.baselgovernance.org\u002Fabout\u002Fpeople\u002Fgretta-fenner), Managing Director of the Basel Institute on Governance, said, “the discussions were really rich and enriching.”\n\nFenner’s sentiments sum up our hands-on classroom dynamic. We experienced sheer zeal inspired by presenters and delegates. The high level of critical thinking driven by discussion leaders brought out candid and provocative responses. All found it easy to engage.\n\n### Read more\n\nThe IAFCL website hosts recent [news and articles by Academy members](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.financialcrimelitigators.org\u002Fmembers-news) – happy reading.","2019-04-10","the-international-academy-of-financial-crime-litigators-qa-with-co-founder-elizabeth-ortega-887","The International Academy of Financial Crime Litigators: Q&A with co-founder Elizabeth Ortega","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F9023e68e-9fb2-42c5-815c-71745ca14b97?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[],[86,87],"Anti-Money Laundering","Asset Recovery",[89,90,91],"Events","Partnerships","International cooperation",[],887,[86,95],"Asset Recovery and Enforcement",[89,90,91],[],[],[100],"Main page",[],"2022-05-26T22:56:53.000Z","2026-06-05T19:01:11.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fthe-international-academy-of-financial-crime-litigators-qa-with-co-founder-elizabeth-ortega-887",{"id":107,"body":108,"status":6,"type":10,"date":109,"slug":110,"title":111,"image":112,"countries":113,"topic":115,"activity":116,"tags":119,"nid":120,"topics":121,"activities":122,"authors":123,"images":125,"websites":126,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":21,"translations":127,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":128,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":129,"content":130,"link":131},10357,"_A Q&A with Mary Muthoni, who led a novel court monitoring project of our International Centre for Asset Recovery (ICAR) in Kenya during 2022._ _The aim was to identify reasons for delays in major corruption trials, as a basis for developing reforms to streamline and speed up the court process. The Court Users Committee has been highly receptive to the findings, which the team presented in March 2023._\n\n### Why monitor corruption cases in court – in Kenya or elsewhere?\n\nCorruption is a crime with a huge negative impact on society. Those who abuse public office and steal public funds should feel the full force of the justice system. Yet all too often, the adjudication processes drag on for years.\n\nCourt monitoring can be a powerful tool to stimulate improvements in the justice system and help bring an end to impunity for the corrupt.\n\nCourt monitoring for corruption cases can identify systemic challenges in adjudicating such cases and provide targeted recommendations to address them. In the longer term, court monitoring can also be the basis for bringing stakeholders together to jointly develop important legislative and procedural reforms.\n\n### How did you approach the court monitoring project?\n\nThe purpose of a court monitoring activity depends on the specific issue one wants to address. In this instance, our objective was to understand what causes delays in adjudicating corruption cases.\n\nOpen-source materials already indicated challenges in concluding corruption cases. But there was no specific data to back this up. When designing our project, we took into account realities on the ground that could lead to these delays, like IT hitches and inadequate case or diary management procedures. Some cases are also just really complex, involving multiple proceedings both at the lower court and high court.\n\nWith limited resources and time, we sampled a variety of cases based on points like the amount of funds involved, the number of accused persons and their profiles, the specific charges and the use of plea bargaining. To measure delays, we looked not only at adjournments but also at the length of time needed for different phases of a case, the number of witnesses and the number of accused individuals.\n\nWe also kept in mind the Judiciary’s performance indicators, policies and frameworks, so that our final recommendations would fit those frameworks.\n\n### What role did the multi-stakeholder Court Users Committee play?\n\nMembers of the Court Users Committee were our main stakeholders in this activity. The Court Users Committee is a forum to improve stakeholder engagement and promote effective and coordinated justice sector partnerships. Similar models exist in other jurisdictions including the UK, Uganda and Somalia.\n\nIn the Kenyan context, the anti-corruption Court Users Committee brings different actors together to share concerns, best practices, activities and actions required for a smoother adjudication process for corruption cases. Among others, the Committee includes representatives from the Anti-Corruption Courts, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission and the Law Society of Kenya.\n\nThe Court Users Committee members were highly receptive of our findings. The report has given them a solid basis to discuss their concerns about delays in corruption cases in depth and try to implement recommendations that are within their powers.\n\n### What kind of data and statistics did you seek to capture, and how?\n\nAs I explained in my [quick guide to court monitoring](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fquick-guide-27-court-monitoring), before capturing data you need to be clear about what your objective is and what type of court monitoring you are doing.\n\nIn our case, looking at delays meant looking at what factors play a role in promoting these delays.\n\n*   Some factors can be inferred from open-access reports published by the Judiciary or other government institutions.\n*   Case files indicate the number of times a case did not proceed, alongside variables like the type of documentation filed and whether it is relevant to the case or not. These variables are harder to quantify but are important to record as they contribute significantly to delays.\n*   Attending court proceedings provides valuable additional insights that you can’t get from paperwork.\n\n### What best practices and recommendations did the court monitoring highlight?\n\nAmong the best practices we noted was the Judiciary providing directions on how the case will progress. For example, the court may provide timelines for serving documents, or directions on whether an application will be heard orally or through written submissions. We also highlighted the use of sanctions in cases where a litigant continuously delays the process, and prompt rulings on each objection raised.\n\nOur recommendations included a significant focus on case management – especially on the type of documentation and witnesses, and more generally the discovery and pre-trial processes. For example, we encourage dealing swiftly with matters on which parties agree in order to focus more efficiently on contentious (disputed) issues.\n\nBetter coordination with the judiciary’s planning department could reduce the number of vacated trials and therefore overall timelines.\n\nThe court monitoring also provided evidence to support investments in technology and in training for younger lawyers, to reduce the number of ineffective trials.\n\n### The bottom line?\n\nCourt delays cost time and money, and can give the impression that justice is not being done. Kenya has the foundations in place for an efficient adjudication process of corruption cases and many dedicated prosecutors, judges and court staff.\n\nEfficient coordination among the relevant agencies and the Bar will be crucial in applying the recommendations to reduce unnecessary delays. Ideally, this will be a process of continuous improvement – monitoring the effectiveness of measures and finding new opportunities to speed up the process and bring the corrupt more quickly to justice.\n\n### Learn more\n\n*   Read Mary Muthoni’s [quick guide to court monitoring](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fquick-guide-27-court-monitoring).\n*   The court monitoring project was funded by the UK Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) as part of a long-running programme of support to Kenya’s anti-corruption efforts. The UK is also core donor to the [International Centre for Asset Recovery.](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fasset-recovery)","2023-03-31","qa-monitoring-corruption-cases-in-kenyan-courts-2426","Q&A: Monitoring corruption cases in Kenyan courts","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F3fba3403-1a80-477a-9b11-be30a72e21ca?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[114],6924,[87],[117,118],"Research","Reports",[],2426,[95],[117,118],[124],998,[],[100],[],"2023-03-31T16:01:28.000Z","2026-06-05T19:01:17.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fqa-monitoring-corruption-cases-in-kenyan-courts-2426",{"id":133,"body":134,"status":6,"type":10,"date":135,"slug":136,"title":137,"image":138,"countries":139,"topic":140,"activity":141,"tags":142,"nid":151,"topics":152,"activities":153,"authors":154,"images":156,"websites":157,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":21,"translations":158,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":159,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":160,"content":161,"link":162},9528,"_A guest interview with_ [_Aidan Larkin_](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.assetreality.com\u002Fteam\u002Faidan-larkin)_, CEO of_ [_Asset Reality_](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.assetreality.com\u002F)_. Aidan presented on_ [_Demystifying crypto asset recovery_](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.youtube.com\u002Fwatch?v=GnuTcu1BHJo) _at the_ [_5th Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptocurrencies_](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002F5CrC\u002F)_, a joint conference of the Basel Institute on Governance, Europol and INTERPOL on 8-9 December 2021. This interview expands on the second of seven_ [_Recommendations_](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fcombating-virtual-assets-based-money-laundering-and-crypto-enabled-crime) _issued following the conference – for more countries to take advantage of their possibilities to recover virtual assets involved in crime and money laundering._\n\n_Part 1 below covers the scope of illicit activity involving crypto assets and why some States are recovering far more crypto assets than others, plus issues around international and public-private cooperation. [Part 2](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fblog\u002Fcrypto-asset-recovery-part-2-defi-auctions-cryptocurrency-bans-and-capacity) deals with the challenges of DeFi platforms for confiscating illicit virtual assets, how and when States should convert the assets to fiat currency, and the one thing that will significantly boost States's ability to recover illicit assets in virtual form._   \n\n### How much illicit activity involves crypto assets?\n\nIllicit cryptocurrency addresses received the equivalent of USD 14 billion in 2021, according to blockchain analysis company [Chainalysis](https:\u002F\u002Fblog.chainalysis.com\u002Freports\u002F2022-crypto-crime-report-introduction\u002F). This is a nearly 80 percent increase from the previous year.\n\nIt sounds a like a frightening rise in illicit activity. In fact, it is a decrease in relation to the total value of cryptocurrency transactions in 2021, which hovers around USD 15.8 trillion. Illicit activity accounts for only 0.15 percent of those transactions.\n\nThe virtual assets industry as a whole covers not only cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum but other digital assets like [non-fungible tokens](https:\u002F\u002Fyoutu.be\u002FKD98ni7xuzI) (NFTs). All of these are exploding. This massive growth means there will inevitably be a lot more crypto-enabled crime and virtual assets-based money laundering in the coming years.\n\nAnd that means governments should be using all available powers to recover illicit digital assets and ensure crime doesn’t pay, even when it takes place in cyberspace. Yet only a few are taking advantage of these possibilities so far.\n\n### How many crypto assets linked to crime and money laundering are being recovered?\n\nSome countries are recovering astonishing amounts of virtual assets.\n\nThe US is in the lead, following its takedown of the [Silk Road market in 2013](https:\u002F\u002Ffortune.com\u002F2017\u002F10\u002F02\u002Fbitcoin-sale-silk-road\u002F). Its Internal Revenue Service [seized USD 3.5 billion in cryptocurrencies](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.nbcnews.com\u002Ftech\u002Fsecurity\u002Firs-seized-35-billion-cryptocurrency-year-agency-says-rcna6157) in the last fiscal year, which is a staggering 93 percent of their total seizures. This week alone they announced a  [USD 3.6 billion crypto seizure](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.justice.gov\u002Fopa\u002Fpr\u002Ftwo-arrested-alleged-conspiracy-launder-45-billion-stolen-cryptocurrency) – possibly the biggest single proceeds of crime seizure of all time. The UK has announced regular [seizures of cryptocurrencies](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.bbc.com\u002Fnews\u002Fuk-england-london-57816644) in the millions of pounds. [Australia](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.theguardian.com\u002Ftechnology\u002F2016\u002Fmay\u002F31\u002Faustralian-police-to-auction-13m-in-confiscated-bitcoins), [Belgium](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.irishtimes.com\u002Fbusiness\u002Ffinancial-services\u002Fonline-auction-of-seized-belgian-bitcoin-begins-next-week-1.3800266), [France](\u002Feconomictimes.indiatimes.com\u002Fmagazines\u002Fpanache\u002Fcashing-in-on-bitcoins-french-government-to-pocket-30-mn-from-first-ever-cryptocurrency-auction\u002Farticleshow\u002F81581150.cms) and other EU member states are also now regularly confiscating and auctioning off crypto assets.\n\nBut some countries have not yet seized or recovered any crypto assets at all. The African continent is number 1 on the cryptocurrency adoption charts, with a [rise of 1,200%](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.weforum.org\u002Fagenda\u002F2021\u002F09\u002Fwhat-are-the-implications-of-widespread-cryptocurrency-adoption-in-africa\u002F) between July 2020–July 2021 alone, for example. But as yet, I am not aware of any significant crypto asset seizures on the continent.\n\n### What is stopping countries from recovering illicit assets held in crypto formats?\n\nOn the legal side, nothing. Any country with basic asset recovery legislation and systems to seize, manage, recover and realise illicit assets can do this. Virtual assets are a store of value, like any other tangible asset (such as gold or art) or intangible asset (such as stocks and shares).\n\nSome confusion arises from the term “cryptocurrencies”, which implies that crypto assets are like cash held in another currency. One might assume that specific cash seizure legislation needs to be amended to cover crypto.\n\nIn fact, in most countries, virtual assets including cryptocurrencies do not function like currencies but like other investments or stores of value, such as gold, art, race horses or yachts. In the context of asset seizure and recovery, they should therefore be regarded like any other such asset. Separate legislation is generally not needed. The same processes to seize, recover and manage the assets apply.\n\nIt would be unusual for a country to not have legislation that allows the freezing of intangible property. So legislation isn’t the barrier. Enabling investigators with the tools and skills to track and trace crypto is key. It’s the equivalent of Customs officers not using intelligence packages and detection techniques to find illegal items. If you’re not looking, you’ll not find it.\n\n### Are there differences in international cooperation when it comes to seizing and confiscating crypto assets?\n\nIn theory, no. In practice, yes.\n\nThe same systems of international cooperation – agreements, legislation, processes, informal communication networks– all apply. And so do the same weaknesses. As those involved in international asset recovery cases well know, [formal channels of cooperation](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fquick-guide-9-international-cooperation-asset-recovery) can be frustratingly slow and ineffective, for reasons outside officers’ control. As for asset recovery in general, informal mechanisms of international cooperation such as the [Egmont Group](https:\u002F\u002Fegmontgroup.org\u002Fen) or [CARIN network](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.carin.network\u002F) are extremely helpful in obtaining information or supporting efforts to advance an investigation.\n\nOn the positive side, the nature of cryptocurrency means much more can be done virtually without the need for international cooperation at all. Transactions are recorded on public blockchains accessible from anywhere in the world. Investigating officers can obtain information and evidence by analysing the blockchain from the comfort of their own office.\n\nNot everyone is aware or has the skills to do this, so we often see requests for cooperation asking for information easily available to the requesting party Officers who do not fully understand the mechanics of crypto assets may also send requests that are impossible to carry out, or “machine gun” requests for lots of data that they in fact do not need.\n\nCapacity and understanding are a problem for the requested party too. If officers who receive requests for assistance are not trained in the basics of virtual assets, they will naturally put it at the bottom of the pile. Too often we witness smaller jurisdictions that house many of the world’s largest virtual currency exchanges being bombarded with requests for assistance that could be dealt with remotely.\n\nAnother factor affecting international cooperation for crypto asset recovery is the vastly increased time pressure. Virtual assets can be transacted around the world and change hands multiple times in minutes. In the context of restraining or freezing assets, this is significantly different to, say, luxury villas or even money in bank accounts, which could take several hours or days to transfer.\n\nSo time is of the essence at the freezing stage, to prevent assets from disappearing or being dissipated while the investigation is underway. This is where effective public-private cooperation comes in.\n\n### How does public-private cooperation work, and is it working?\n\nIt works pretty well – in many senses, much better than in non-crypto cases.\n\nFirst, many of the major virtual asset service providers (VASPs), such as cryptocurrency exchanges, are being encouragingly proactive in supporting law enforcement. For example:\n\n*   Some have dedicated departments for dealing with authorities’ requests for information and cooperation.\n*   We have seen some VASPs restricting suspects’ access to assets upon receiving a foreign court order, rather than waiting for a local one to be issued by the domestic courts. This is similar to how banks may treat a regular bank account containing suspected illicit funds.\n*   VASPS may also place “soft blocks” on suspect assets, if the requesting authority can demonstrate the assets are linked to criminality. This prevents them being dissipated before official freezing orders make their way through the system.\n\nSecond, private blockchain analytics and investigation companies are an essential partner to law enforcement when it comes to analysing the blockchain for information and gathering evidence, or developing tools and infrastructure to help them enable more seizures.\n\nThe [takedown of the Welcome to Video child exploitation site](https:\u002F\u002Fblog.chainalysis.com\u002Freports\u002Fchainalysis-doj-welcome-to-video-shutdown\u002F), and multiple international arrests, which had 1.3 million Bitcoin addresses registered and received thousands of Bitcoin payments, would not have happened as effectively if it weren’t for those levels of cooperation.\n\n### Learn more\n\n*   View [Part 2](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fblog\u002Fcrypto-asset-recovery-part-2-defi-auctions-cryptocurrency-bans-and-capacity) of this interview, which deals with the challenges of DeFi platforms for confiscating illicit virtual assets, how and when States should convert the assets to fiat currency, and the one thing that will significantly boost States's ability to recover illicit assets in virtual form.\n*   View the [5th Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptocurrencies](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002F5CrC) landing page and post-conference [Recommendations on combating virtual assets-based money laundering and crypto-enabled crime](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fpublications\u002Fcombating-virtual-assets-based-money-laundering-and-crypto-enabled-crime).\n*   View Aidan Larkin's conference presentation on [Demystifying crypto asset recovery](https:\u002F\u002Fyoutu.be\u002FGnuTcu1BHJo) or download the [slides](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fsites\u002Fdefault\u002Ffiles\u002F2021-12\u002F5CRC%20Aidan%20Larkin_small.pdf).","2022-02-21","crypto-asset-recovery-qa-part-1-scope-laws-and-cooperation-2185","Crypto asset recovery Q&A part 1 – Scope, laws and cooperation","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F90a0e304-0258-4c7e-92aa-086a98a75096?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[],[87],[17],[143,147],{"tags_id":144},{"id":145,"name":146},818,"Anti-money laundering",{"tags_id":148},{"id":149,"name":150},854,"Virtual assets",2185,[95],[17],[155],1173,[],[100],[],"2022-05-26T22:52:02.000Z","2026-06-05T19:01:07.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fcrypto-asset-recovery-qa-part-1-scope-laws-and-cooperation-2185",{"id":164,"body":165,"status":6,"type":10,"date":166,"slug":167,"title":168,"image":169,"countries":170,"topic":172,"activity":174,"tags":175,"nid":176,"topics":177,"activities":178,"authors":179,"images":180,"websites":21,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":22,"translations":181,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":182,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":8,"content":183,"link":184},10599,"Women can play a crucial role in the fight against corruption. This is the conviction that underpins the work of [SPAK Indonesia](http:\u002F\u002Fwww.spakindonesia.org\u002F), the organisation awarded Outstanding Achievement in Collective Action at the [International Collective Action Awards 2025](https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002Fget-involved\u002Fevents\u002Fawards-2025\u002Fawards).\n\nBut why women, specifically? Because of their central role in transmitting moral and ethical values within their families and communities, shaping society from the inside.\n\nOriginated from the SPAK movement (\"I am a Woman Against Corruption\"), SPAK Indonesia has, for over a decade, systematised and built anti-corruption ecosystems through a network of “agents”: women from diverse backgrounds who promote integrity values across different private and public contexts.\n\nThe Outstanding Achievement in Collective Action award they received is a well-deserved recognition of their leadership, impact and innovation in corruption.\n\nIn this interview, Maria Kresentia, Director of SPAK Indonesia, reflects on how the organisation operates, the challenges it has encountered and the strategies that have enabled it to sustain this work. \n\n### SPAK is known for empowering women and communities to fight corruption through education and everyday actions. Can you briefly explain how your approach works in practice and what makes it effective?\n\nCorruption is often viewed as something distant from oneself, as many people still believe that corruption is committed only by government officials. Addressing corruption is also often considered solely the responsibility of law enforcement authorities. SPAK takes a different approach by demonstrating that violations of moral and ethical values that become habitual are the starting point of larger corrupt practices.\n\nTherefore, corruption becomes everyone’s concern, and its prevention can begin with each individual through the implementation of anti-corruption values in everyday life.\n\nWomen play a strategic role in promoting integrity and ethical behaviour. As primary caregivers, they are often the first to introduce moral and ethical values to the next generation. \n\nIn the Indonesian context, women also benefit from strong social participation and community access. These factors enable women to serve as effective agents in disseminating anti-corruption values at both household and community levels.\n\nTo facilitate this role, SPAK has developed anti-corruption learning tools in the form of board games designed for different age groups. This approach has proven effective in fostering behavioural change through women-led corruption prevention initiatives.\n\n### Your work relies strongly on collaboration between citizens, schools, civil society and public institutions. Why is Collective Action so important for fighting corruption in Indonesia?\n\nAll Indonesian citizens have a responsibility to combat corruption. Under the SPAK approach, awareness of moral and ethical values as the foundation of anti-corruption principles must be instilled in everyone, regardless of rank or authority.\n\nWhile law enforcement remains important, building a society that is committed to anti-corruption values is equally critical to prevention efforts. This can only be achieved through coordinated actions among institutions and communities.\n\n### Looking back over the past years, what has been one of the biggest challenges SPAK has faced in building and maintaining this movement, and how did you overcome it?\n\nOne of the challenges is that prevention-oriented anti-corruption initiatives that centre on moral and ethical values are often underestimated and considered insufficiently newsworthy, causing stories of positive behavioural change to be overlooked by the media.\n\nOn the other hand, coverage of corrupt officials being arrested is generally viewed as more compelling than stories of teachers in remote elementary schools who refuse gifts from students in order to uphold the principle of fairness.\n\nTo address this challenge, SPAK consistently involves the media in its programmes, encouraging coverage that highlights how the application of anti-corruption values leads to meaningful change.\n\nSecuring funding support also remains challenging, as many institutions seek quick and measurable results. In response, SPAK proactively fosters collaboration with ministries, government bodies, local governments, the private sector and educational institutions to advance integrity-building efforts that are vital to strengthening Indonesia’s human capital.\n\nFinally, mobilising young people to take part in corruption prevention efforts, starting with the cultivation of anti-corruption values, is challenging, as youth are often more interested in dramatic and confrontational actions such as demonstrations that may lead to violence.\n\nTo channel this energy constructively, SPAK facilitates online, inter-campus discussions on up-to-date issues, inviting respected and influential speakers.\n\nBy embedding anti-corruption values within these discussions, SPAK successfully engages students in meaningful dialogue while strengthening their understanding of integrity as a key solution to corruption.\n\n### What does winning the Outstanding Achievement in Collective Action Award mean for SPAK Indonesia and the women in your network who have been working on anti-corruption for over a decade?\n\nReceiving this award is evidence that Indonesian women – regardless of their educational background or profession – are capable of building networks to drive change in the context of combating corruption.\n\nAfter receiving this international recognition, what are SPAK’s main priorities for the next phase of your work, and how do you hope the award will support your future plans?\n\nSPAK will remain committed to promoting anti-corruption values, which we consider essential in the fight against corruption in Indonesia. We seek to inspire more role models across government, private and educational institutions who are willing to lead change.\n\nThe awards we have received have strengthened our confidence that collaboration is the best way to build and expand an anti-corruption movement in society.\n\nThank you, Maria Kresentia for this enlightening conversation!\n\n### About the International Collective Action Awards\n\nThe International Collective Action Awards are awarded every year and acknowledge initiatives that showcase outstanding results, emerging best practices and innovation in the field of Collective Action to tackle corruption and raise standards of business integrity.\n\nThe Basel Institute on Governance, supported by an international jury of experts and a public vote, will present two Collective Action Awards at [6th International Collective Action Conference 2026](https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002Fget-involved\u002Fevents\u002Ficac-2026).\n\n*   Outstanding Achievement in Collective Action: This award recognises organisations or initiatives that have made a significant contribution to fairer market conditions and the prevention of corruption through sustained and effective engagement in Collective Action.\n*   Collective Action Inspirational Newcomer: This award recognises organisations or initiatives that have been active in the field of Collective Action for less than two years and have shown strong potential to inspire others through their approach and early impact.\n\nNominations for the 2026 Awards are opened. For more information on the eligibility criteria, the selection process and the public vote, read the [award methodology](https:\u002F\u002Fb20-dev.baselgovernance.org\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002Fa54d560f-0d11-439a-ac88-8bf89a6a2120) or visit the [Collective Action website](https:\u002F\u002Fcollective-action.com\u002Fget-involved\u002Fawards). The awards are presented with the support of the [Siemens Integrity Initiative](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.siemens.com\u002Fglobal\u002Fen\u002Fcompany\u002Fabout\u002Fcompliance\u002Fcollective-action.html#SiemensIntegrityInitiativePuttingCollectiveActionintopractice).","2026-02-27","the-power-of-women-as-agents-of-anti-corruption-qa-with-spak-indonesia-2928","The power of women as agents of anti-corruption: Q&A with SPAK Indonesia","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F34519ca2-407d-4b49-90a0-88970e8636d7?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[171],7803,[173],"Collective Action",[14],[],2928,[173],[],[],[],[],"2026-02-27T15:07:16.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fthe-power-of-women-as-agents-of-anti-corruption-qa-with-spak-indonesia-2928",{"id":186,"body":187,"status":6,"type":10,"date":188,"slug":189,"title":190,"image":191,"countries":192,"topic":193,"activity":195,"tags":196,"nid":197,"topics":198,"activities":199,"authors":200,"images":201,"websites":202,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":21,"translations":203,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":204,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":205,"content":206,"link":207},9720,"The recently published [Global Mapping of Anti-Corruption Authorities](https:\u002F\u002Frm.coe.int\u002Fncpa-analysis-report-global-mapping-acas\u002F16809e790b) fills a critical gap in information about national anti-corruption authorities (ACAs) around the world. ACAs are key institutions to prevent and combat corruption, but until now centralised data on their mandates, activities and even existence has been lacking.\n\nThe survey is a project of the French Anti-Corruption Agency ([AFA](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.agence-francaise-anticorruption.gouv.fr\u002Ffr)) in partnership with the Council of Europe’s Group of States against Corruption ([GRECO](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.coe.int\u002Fen\u002Fweb\u002Fgreco)), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development ([OECD](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.oecd.org\u002F)) and the Network of Corruption Prevention Authorities ([NCPA](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.coe.int\u002Fen\u002Fweb\u002Fcorruption\u002Fncpa-network)).\n\nIzadora Zubek, International Affairs Officer at the AFA, explores some of the report’s key findings and their implications for anti-corruption practice and cooperation.\n\n### 1\\. You launched the survey because \"...information about anti-corruption authorities (ACAs) is rather hard to find.\" What problems does this cause?\n\nFirst and foremost, this lack of information may hinder international cooperation on anti-corruption. We believe that, in order to design and implement efficient cooperation activities, it is crucial to know three basic things:\n\n*   who the competent actors are in a given country;\n*   what can be asked from them in light of their mandates;\n*   how to contact them.\n\nNot having this information may cause problems for a vast array of actors involved in cooperation projects: international organisations, donor agencies, civil society organisations, other ACAs… We think that knowing your potential partners is key to building meaningful partnerships.\n\nSecondly, this lack of information can be a problem for companies operating far from home. When these companies are confronted with dubious situations in a foreign country, it might be useful to know who they can turn to. ACAs are central institutional actors that can help companies to understand the applicable anti-corruption standards, and navigate through the relevant channels for reporting misconduct. Lack of information can entail a risky lack of guidance and clarity about the existent rules. This can also affect national companies and citizens: in some cases, it is not clear who are the contact points for anti-corruption in one’s own country.\n\nFinally, this lack of information can be a problem for anti-corruption experts and researchers. ACAs often play a pivotal role in coordinating anti-corruption efforts in their countries. It might be difficult to grasp the intricacies of national anti-corruption systems when one has no or little information about the pillars of such systems.\n\n### 2\\. Why is it so hard to find this information? Should ACAs communicate more about their work?\n\nThis information is hard to find because, as far as we know, there is no single, up-to-date platform centralising all the relevant data about ACAs. While drafting the report, we have found a very interesting [portal](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.acauthorities.org\u002F) dedicated to ACAs, with plenty of valuable resources. However, this portal, which was created by the World Bank in collaboration with the United Nation Office of Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the U.S. State Department, and the European Commission, does not seem to have been updated in recent years.\n\nWe do encourage ACAs to communicate about their work, but we do not think that more communication by ACAs alone can solve this issue. Almost 200 national authorities contributed to our study. It would be quite difficult to keep track of the activities of all these ACAs if we had to check each and every organisation’s website.\n\nMoreover, there is the language barrier: ACAs may not have the necessary resources to translate the content they produce, thus limiting their ability to communicate with their foreign counterparts.  \n\nConsequently, we consider that information needs to be compiled and made easily accessible to an international audience. In this sense, the [Network of Corruption Prevention Authorities](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.coe.int\u002Fen\u002Fweb\u002Fcorruption\u002Fncpa-network) can be especially useful. The Network provides a forum to connect ACAs, and help them gather and share information about their work regardless of national frontiers.\n\n### 3\\. Did you find out anything surprising about the characteristics and needs of ACAs – or anything that will change the strategy of the NCPA?\n\nIt was surprising to observe that a majority of ACAs have investigative powers. Given this characteristic, it might be interesting to develop more exchange of good practices and experiences on corruption detection, and examine its linkages with prevention.\n\nIn addition, the study has shown that, in most countries, mandatory anti-corruption standards only concern the public sector. Therefore, few ACAs actually seem to monitor or support the private sector’s compliance with anti-corruption requirements. We could direct our efforts to close this gap.\n\nFinally, thanks to the survey, we have noticed that many Supreme Audit Institutions were closely involved in preventing corruption. We are currently exploring ways to enhance collaboration between the NCPA and these institutions to pursue our common goals.\n\n### 4\\. GRECO and the OECD have already published recommendations on establishing and operating ACAs. What is the added value of connecting the key contact points in ACAs in different countries?\n\nThe added value of such connections lies in their potential to foster peer-to-peer cooperation regarding concrete issues encountered by ACA staff in their daily work. The NCPA is a network of practitioners, for practitioners: our focus is to support operational exchanges in the specific field of corruption prevention.\n\nFurthermore, in order to promote anti-corruption globally, it can be particularly valuable to reach out to ACAs that are not from GRECO or OECD Member States, to share our experience in implementing the recommendations of these bodies, and to learn from their experience with different evaluation mechanisms.\n\nAs a matter of fact, this global mapping project gave us a good occasion to contact and exchange with ACAs that we do not usually meet because they are seldom involved in GRECO or the OECD’s activities.\n\n### 5\\. Is there already appetite among ACAs to exchange more with their peers? If so, what aspects are people most interested in learning about?\n\nYes, we have been contacted by several ACAs following the publication of our study. They have expressed their interest in exchanging more with their peers and in joining or partnering with the NCPA. In a certain way, this study seemed to have reminded them that they are not alone. By focusing on the common characteristics and expectations of authorities tasked with fighting corruption, the study contributed to shedding light on the global community of ACAs.\n\nPeople are interested in learning about corruption prevention, which is at the heart of the NCPA. In the context of the covid-19 pandemic, preventive measures are vital to mitigate rising corruption risks, and to restore trust in public institutions and decision-makers. We need to stop corruption before it occurs because, when faced with an unprecedented crisis, the stakes are even higher, and the consequences of any lack of vigilance even worse. For this reason, the NCPA released a special [statement](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.coe.int\u002Fen\u002Fweb\u002Fcorruption\u002Fncpa\u002Fevents) about the key role of corruption prevention in the global response to covid-19.\n\nIn addition, following covid-19 lockdowns and other movement restrictions, we have noted a growing interest in modern technologies and digital tools to prevent and detect corruption. The NCPA is currently carrying out a project about this topic.\n\n### 6\\. Are there any concrete examples of peer learning and cooperation between ACAs that demonstrate the value of a stronger network?\n\nThe process of drafting the NCPA’s [technical guide](https:\u002F\u002Frm.coe.int\u002Ftechnical-guide-to-corruption-prevention-instruments\u002F168098d06a) on codes of conduct can be considered as a concrete example of peer learning and cooperation between ACAs. Coordinated by the Italian Anti-Corruption Authority, this project was a great opportunity to organise a collective discussion about codes of conduct. Together, we asked ourselves what constitutes an effective code of conduct, shared experiences, challenges, and lessons learnt, in order to eventually publish a single guidance document.\n\nLikewise, we are producing guidance on small facilitation payments, a form of bribery that can vary depending on context and country. Addressing this issue between ACAs is helpful to find a common ground and, through enhanced cooperation, formulate harmonised recommendations. By pooling our diverse capacities and knowledge in a stronger network, we hope to maximize our efforts to protect our societies from corruption.\n\n### 7\\. A directory of contact details is necessary but not sufficient to \"facilitate operational exchanges\". How will you go from contact details to meaningful contact and cooperation?\n\nWe are designing an outreach strategy to go from the identification of counterparts to the development of fruitful partnerships, and are working to include new ACAs in the NCPA’s activities. The directory of contact details is not an end in itself, but rather a tool to improve cooperation.\n\nNevertheless, meaningful cooperation cannot be achieved overnight, and thus we are adopting a step-by-step approach. We have recently published the results of the global mapping of ACAs, which was a lot of work. Now we are looking for ways to establish the international directory of ACAs. Then, we will propose further activities to support this new community of ACAs. In other words, this is still a work in progress.\n\n_As International Affairs Officer at the French Anti-Corruption Agency (AFA), Izadora Zubek is in charge of developing the AFA’s bilateral and multilateral international relations, including activities related to the Network of Corruption Prevention Authorities (NCPA). [Profile](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.baselgovernance.org\u002Fabout\u002Fpeople\u002Fizadora-zubek)._\n\n### Find out more\n\n*   Learn why the Basel Institute on Governance has recently [become an affiliated partner](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.baselgovernance.org\u002Fnews\u002Fstopping-corruption-it-occurs-why-basel-institute-has-become-partner-network-corruption) to the NCPA.\n*   Find out more about the [NCPA and its partners.](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.coe.int\u002Fen\u002Fweb\u002Fcorruption\u002Fncpa-network)\n*   Download the [Global Mapping of Anti-Corruption Authorities](https:\u002F\u002Frm.coe.int\u002Fncpa-analysis-report-global-mapping-acas\u002F16809e790b) report.","2020-06-22","mapping-anti-corruption-authorities-around-the-world-qa-with-the-french-anti-corruption-agency-1776","Mapping anti-corruption authorities around the world – Q&A with the French Anti-Corruption Agency","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F1e12a34f-179f-4586-8d81-70f0023ed254?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[],[173,194],"Private Sector",[117,118,90],[],1776,[173,194],[117,118,90],[],[],[100,173],[],"2022-05-26T22:54:46.000Z","2026-06-05T19:01:09.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fmapping-anti-corruption-authorities-around-the-world-qa-with-the-french-anti-corruption-agency-1776",{"id":209,"body":210,"status":6,"type":10,"date":211,"slug":212,"title":213,"image":214,"countries":215,"topic":216,"activity":217,"tags":218,"nid":221,"topics":222,"activities":223,"authors":224,"images":225,"websites":226,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":21,"translations":227,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":228,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":229,"content":230,"link":231},10494,"Shenaz Muzaffer, General Counsel of the [International Association of Prosecutors](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.iap-association.org\u002F), spoke at the [8th Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptocurrencies](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fnews\u002Fcryptocurrencies-and-financial-crime-strategic-approach-ensure-security) in a panel on “practical challenges in the investigation and prosecution of crypto-related financial crimes.” The two-day conference was co-organised by Europol and the Basel Institute on Governance and hosted by UNODC.\n\nThis Q&A takes up the main points of her intervention on prosecuting crypto-related cases.\n\n### Where do you see the main challenge for prosecutors in cases involving cryptocurrencies?\n\nCriminals are increasingly using crypto assets to facilitate the commission of their offences and to launder the proceeds of crime. Cryptocurrencies are being used to commit traditional crimes in new and innovative ways, as well as to commit new types of offences.\n\nTo continue to be able to meet those challenges, we – as prosecutors – have to evolve and adapt too. But we face a number of challenges, relating to both the investigation and the prosecution of crypto-related financial crimes.\n\nThe first challenge relates to the legislative framework in the jurisdictions in which we work. In many of our jurisdictions, if not in all, the relevant legislation was drafted prior to the invention of cryptocurrencies. We know that the first cryptocurrency was launched in 2009. But in the UK, for instance, the Fraud Act dates back to 2006, while the Proceeds of Crime Act is from 2002.\n\nThis means that, because of the way the legislation is drafted, it can’t always be readily applied to the prosecution of crypto-related financial crimes. We need to ask, for example, whether the definition of “property” within existing legislation is broad enough to encompass crypto assets. It’s not only a challenge for the prosecution, but also for when we are looking to recover assets.\n\nWe have to consider whether our legislative frameworks need to be revised or adapted to make sure that they are framed in a way which is broad and permissive enough so that we can capture these new types of offences and assets that we're dealing with. We must also ensure that we are cognisant of potential further changes that may arise in future and try, insofar as possible, to ensure that the legislation is sufficiently capable of encompassing them as well.\n\nEarlier this year, the UK introduced [legislation](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.gov.uk\u002Fgovernment\u002Fpublications\u002Feconomic-crime-and-corporate-transparency-act-2023-factsheets\u002Feconomic-crime-and-corporate-transparency-act-cryptoassets-legislation) that enables law enforcement to seize items such as memory sticks or written passwords, and also to transfer illegal crypto assets into a law enforcement wallet.\n\n### Crypto-related crimes are often transnational in nature – how does this affect investigators and prosecutors?\n\nWe all know that criminals don't respect jurisdictional boundaries and that crime is becoming increasingly international. So the second challenge from a prosecution point of view relates to jurisdictional issues.\n\nWe also all know that coordination between law enforcement agencies and prosecutors can be slow and cumbersome, and that the formal process of seeking mutual legal assistance (MLA) comes with its own set of challenges.\n\nAll these challenges reinforce the need for effective networks, both at a law enforcement and a prosecutorial level. It makes no sense for us to work in silos when we have to work across so many jurisdictions.\n\nThat is why organisations such as the [International Association of Prosecutors](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.iap-association.org\u002F) are absolutely critical. They enable prosecutors to build these necessary networks and facilitate formal and informal international cooperation.\n\n### How can law enforcement officers and prosecutors keep up with this fast-evolving topic?\n\nBlockchain technology is inherently complex and new innovations such as non-fungible tokens (NTFs) are going to make things even more complex and complicated. The technical complexity of the subject matter is a very practical challenge.\n\nConsequently, it can be very challenging for prosecutors to properly understand the evidence that is presented to them by law enforcement. It's often even more difficult for those working within the courts, where judges and juries responsible for deciding on the facts of a case may never have come across crypto assets before. As a result, it can be incredibly hard for them to properly understand the relevance and the importance of evidence that's put before them.\n\nThe solution, I would suggest, is twofold:\n\n*   For the prosecutors, there is an enhanced need for specialised training, so that we can properly understand the evidence we're presented with by investigators.\n*   For judges and juries, there’s a need to rely on experts that guide them through the process and help them understand the relevance of the evidence before them.\n\n### Does digital evidence pose particular challenges?\n\nYes, there are specific difficulties around the collection and preservation of the evidence. Digital evidence can be more easily altered. It can be encrypted. It can be deleted much more easily than other tangible forms of evidence.\n\nEstablishing a chain of custody – a chronological documentation or paper trail that records when, how and by whom a piece of evidence was collected, analysed, controlled, transferred or disposed during an investigation – can be challenging itself, not to mention the added complexity caused by the sheer volume of the material that we have to deal with.\n\nDeveloping standard operating procedures or guidelines for the identification, collection and extraction of digital evidence, in my view, is absolutely vital. The same goes for using new technology to understand the evidence that is presented to us. Of course, artificial intelligence or AI plays an important role in this.\n\nThe flipside is that we, as prosecutors, have to make sure that when we're using AI to interpret evidence, we are always cognisant of the need for transparency and accountability, and make sure that we are using AI responsibly.\n\n### What challenges do crypto-related financial crimes pose for asset recovery?\n\nAs practitioners we know that a case does not stop at the point of conviction. In fact, the investigation into the money side of things can often take longer than the investigation into the substantive crime itself.\n\nCrypto assets in particular can be moved very quickly at the touch of a button, which means that these assets can be very hard to trace and restrain. That also has a knock-on effect on public confidence because, if digital assets cannot be recovered and victims are not getting restitution, that impacts negatively on how they view the criminal justice system as a whole.\n\nOne potential mitigation relates to the point I previously made about legislative frameworks –what they permit us to do and the need for revision. Let’s take another example from the new UK legislation I mentioned. This allows us to authorise the sale of crypto assets in the same way as more tangible forms of evidence. It also gives the police the power to destroy crypto assets, where returning them to circulation is not conducive to the public good.\n\n### There’s no digital silver bullet, then?\n\nUnfortunately, there's no single solution that will address all the multiple challenges we’ve identified in both the investigation and prosecution of crypto-related financial crimes.\n\nInstead, we need a multi-pronged approach that includes enhanced training, the use of experts, expanded legislation, robust frameworks for evidence collection and, of course, more effective international cooperation.","2024-10-08","challenges-in-prosecuting-crypto-related-crimes-qa-with-shenaz-muzaffer-2703","Challenges in prosecuting crypto-related crimes – Q&A with Shenaz Muzaffer","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F0f668f60-8e44-4f92-b77d-83812d6a5960?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[],[87],[89,17],[219],{"tags_id":220},{"id":149,"name":150},2703,[95],[89,17],[],[],[100],[],"2024-10-08T10:01:37.000Z","2026-06-05T19:01:18.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fchallenges-in-prosecuting-crypto-related-crimes-qa-with-shenaz-muzaffer-2703",{"id":233,"body":234,"status":6,"type":10,"date":235,"slug":236,"title":237,"image":238,"countries":239,"topic":240,"activity":241,"tags":242,"nid":247,"topics":248,"activities":249,"authors":250,"images":251,"websites":252,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":21,"translations":253,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":254,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":205,"content":255,"link":256},9727,"In this short interview, Susanne Friedrich, Director of the [Alliance for Integrity](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.allianceforintegrity.org\u002F), offers her insights into the current challenges faced by SMEs and how Collective Action can help them emerge stronger on the other side.\n\n### What challenges are SMEs facing right now related to integrity and compliance?\n\nSMEs around the globe are facing considerable uncertainty and economic pressure as demand is down and supply chains are disrupted. Many countries have started to relax restrictions, but we are still far from business as usual. The implications of the pandemic are profound.\n\nAs a result, SMEs are accelerating the digitalisation of their operations. This creates new challenges and risks, many of which are linked to compliance and integrity.\n\nSMEs engaged in the Alliance for Integrity brought up important issues such as:\n\n*   data protection and cybersecurity in times of mobile working\n*   integrating compliance into e-procurement and online due diligence processes\n*   addressing new ethical dilemmas that result from the crisis, and\n*   training employees on compliance online.\n\n### You have said that Collective Action is \"particularly suited to overcome the consequences of the pandemic\"? Why?\n\nSMEs have very limited financial and personnel resources for compliance. Yet, the pandemic and the accelerating digitalisation of operations underline the need to update corruption risk assessments and adapt compliance policies and regulations.\n\nCollective Action is especially helpful in this regard. SMEs benefit from the pooling of resources, peer-learning and the sharing of knowledge. Good practice examples from other companies can provide impulses to implement digital and innovative approaches in SMEs.\n\nCompliance officers from larger companies also have a vital role to play. Their technical knowledge and practical experience are in high demand among SMEs that are currently adapting their compliance procedures.\n\nGetting private sector, public sector, civil society and international organisations together to join forces for integrity is also key to ensure that standards are upheld during the crisis.\n\nAnd last but not least, Collective Action fosters transparency in times where large amounts of public spending are dedicated to relieving the economic and social consequences of Covid-19. In this context, trust in our institutions is the backbone to build more resilient societies.\n\n### How is Alliance for Integrity helping SMEs?\n\nThe Alliance for Integrity offers a wide array of activities, such as focused working group meetings, compliance trainings, public-private dialogue and peer-learning formats.\n\nThe “Integrity Journey”, for instance, is a training and coaching programme conceived and implemented by large companies, business associations and chambers as well as civil society in order to build compliance capacities among SMEs and strengthen their competitiveness.\n\nSMEs that participated in the “Integrity Journey” told us that the programme has helped them to better react during the coronavirus crisis. As a result of the Integrity Journey they knew their business partners, were aware of the main risks and had defined processes to be able to deal with them. Improved compliance capacities thus make SMEs more resilient in case of a crisis.\n\nSince we are now working from home, most of our activities take place online. A working group of experienced compliance officers has made an effort to digitalise our training programme “From Companies to Companies”. We will pilot the online trainings in June 2020.\n\nFurthermore, we have launched a [webpage](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.allianceforintegrity.org\u002Fen\u002Falliance-for-integrity\u002Fcovid-19\u002Findex.php) on integrity in times of crisis with quotes from partners, good practice examples and a collection of articles on covid-19 and implications on compliance.\n\nLastly, we are developing a webinar series in Latin America on integrity in times of crisis, where we will look at topics such as behavioural compliance, integrity in e-procurement and online due diligence processes, data protection, and how to uphold high standards of compliance and integrity in times of crisis. Sign up for our [newsletter](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.allianceforintegrity.org\u002Fen\u002Fnewsletter\u002F) or check our [website](http:\u002F\u002Fwww.allianceforintegrity.org\u002Fen) for the latest updates.\n\n### The UK government's Business Integrity Initiative is fully subsidising [bespoke integrity guidance services for SMEs](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.baselgovernance.org\u002Fnews\u002Ffree-integrity-guidance-services-smes-until-end-july-under-uk-business-integrity-initiative) during the covid-19 situation. What value will that provide?\n\nCompliance and integrity are relevant topics for companies of all sizes and across all sectors. With covid-19 uncertainty and economic pressure mounting, offering guidance services to SMEs for free is not only a kind gesture but will hopefully go a long way in strengthening compliance and integrity in the economic system.\n\n### _About the author_\n\n_Susanne Friedrich is the Director of the Alliance for Integrity, a global business-driven, multi-stakeholder initiative seeking to promote transparency and integrity in the economic system. Susanne is an organisational developer with large experience in capacity building and multi-stakeholder management. Before joining the Alliance for Integrity in 2018, she used to work in various projects of the German development cooperation in Latin America and Germany, in fields such as inclusive business and sustainable value chains, export promotion for SMEs and capacity building for decentralisation in the Andean region._","2020-06-04","how-collective-action-can-help-smes-overcome-the-pandemic-qa-with-the-alliance-for-integritys-susanne-friedrich-1771","How Collective Action can help SMEs overcome the pandemic – Q&A with the Alliance for Integrity's Susanne Friedrich","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002Fe3b88b7a-51de-4337-944c-eea19e5d3763?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[],[173,194],[90],[243],{"tags_id":244},{"id":245,"name":246},1381,"Health",1771,[173,194],[90],[],[],[100,173],[],"2022-05-26T22:54:51.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fhow-collective-action-can-help-smes-overcome-the-pandemic-qa-with-the-alliance-for-integritys-susanne-friedrich-1771",{"id":258,"body":259,"status":6,"type":10,"date":260,"slug":261,"title":262,"image":263,"countries":264,"topic":280,"activity":281,"tags":282,"nid":287,"topics":288,"activities":289,"authors":290,"images":292,"websites":293,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":21,"translations":294,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":295,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":296,"content":297,"link":298},10462,"_A new guide to non-conviction based forfeiture published by GAFILAT, the Latin American body of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) sets out good practices for this powerful but under-used form of asset recovery legislation. It also emphasises the need for laws to align with both domestic constitutions and international human rights standards._\n\n_The GAFILAT guide was drafted by Oscar Solórzano in collaboration with the region’s Asset Recovery Network (RRAG). Oscar is Head of Latin America at the Basel Institute on Governance and a Senior Asset Recovery Specialist with many years of experience supporting government partners across Latin America in high-profile, complex cases of corruption and asset recovery._\n\n_In this Q&A, he explains the approach, relevance and impact of the_ [_Guía de Buenas Prácticas sobre Extinción de Dominio y Decomiso no Basado en Condena_](https:\u002F\u002Fcopolad.eu\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2024\u002F07\u002FCOPOLAD_Publicaciones_Guia_de_Buenas_Practicas_sobre_Extincion_de_Dominio.pdf)_, which was published by GAFILAT in 2024 and financed by EU member states through the_ [_COPOLAD III_](https:\u002F\u002Fcopolad.eu\u002Fen\u002F) _cooperation programme. COPOLAD III is a consortium led by the Italo-Latin American Association (IILA) and FIIAPP of the Spanish Cooperation._\n\n### 1\\. What is the guide about and who is it for?\n\nThis is a guide to good practices in non-conviction based forfeiture for Latin America. It analyses the existence and implementation of non-conviction based forfeiture mechanisms in the 18 GAFILAT countries, which provided useful data during the drafting process and very detailed comments during the review.\n\nThe guide contains an analysis of economic criminality in Latin America and the public policy response. It also addresses the essential concepts and standards applicable to non-conviction based forfeiture, presents case studies and explores available data from GAFILAT countries.\n\nPolicymakers, legislators, law enforcement and judicial practitioners, law students and civil society – including journalists who report on these complex topics – will benefit from the guidance.\n\n### 2\\. Why is there a need for guidance?\n\nThe expansion of non-conviction based forfeiture legislation has accelerated in Latin America in recent years, and not necessarily in the most coordinated or harmonised way. In line with the [updated FATF standards relating to asset recovery](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fblog\u002Ffatf-seeks-change-landscape-international-asset-recovery-what-means-latin-america), it is expected that it will continue to expand in the region.\n\nIn effect, the FATF’s updated Recommendations 4 and 38 make the adoption of non-conviction based forfeiture laws mandatory and seek to ensure that decisions based on these laws can be enforced internationally.\n\nThe guide therefore appears at an ideal time. It proposes a way to harmonise this type of law while respecting the legislative diversity that exists in the region.\n\n### 3\\. The idea is that non-conviction based forfeiture can reduce economic and organised crime – even without the threat of criminal convictions. Can you justify that?\n\nEconomic crimes are perpetrated for the purpose of obtaining illicit economic advantages. Laws that reduce such economic advantages are a concrete step forward. And jurisdictions with more powerful and varied legal tools are more likely to see their crime rates decrease, simply because there is a concrete societal response to the criminal phenomenon.\n\nWithout comprehensive asset recovery laws and an effective judicial apparatus to implement them, various incentives for engaging in profitable criminal activity arise. Some studies show that the lack of effective legal mechanisms targeting criminal assets has, among other things, allowed an explosion of organised and economic crime in Latin America in all its manifestations.\n\nThe same goes for the growth of public-sector corruption. Assets stolen through corruption have rarely been confiscated in the past, when asset recovery was only possible in the context of criminal proceedings. \n\nIt is naïve to think that a legislative instrument alone can change the reality of crime in Latin America, where the most fearsome drug cartels operate and, according to all international indices, corruption is rampant from north to south. However, the empirical experience I have gathered while working for almost 15 years in this part of the world indicates that there is a (positive) difference in the criminal situation of countries that effectively implement asset recovery mechanisms.\n\nA robust legal toolkit for asset recovery also alters the behaviour of criminal organisations, which have to bear higher costs to develop more sophistication in their criminal activities or simply relocate their activity to jurisdictions less equipped with legal tools and the ability to wield them.\n\nIn Peru, to take a positive example, non-conviction based forfeiture is proving a powerful way to get at numerous politicians who have been accused of corruption, but where criminal proceedings seem to be never-ending. The independence of Peru’s non-conviction based forfeiture law from criminal procedures allows prosecutors to target assets even if their owners inevitably slip through the nets of justice.\n\n### 4\\. What does the guide show about the prevalence and success of different forms of non-conviction based forfeiture in the region?\n\nOn paper, there has been a lot of progress in the adoption of non-conviction based forfeiture in Latin America. Only two countries in the region do not have any form of non-conviction based forfeiture law. The most predominant form is arguably [Extinción de dominio](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fnews\u002Flatin-americas-model-law-non-conviction-based-forfeiture-illicit-assets-turns-10-what-now), which has existed for 13 years. Ten out of the 18 countries have incorporated it into their legal arsenals and apply it in various forms and degrees.\n\nExtinción de dominio is a flexible law that can operate in civil, criminal or administrative matters, or even completely independently. It has developed specific concepts that make it possible to broaden the grounds for asset forfeiture. It lists an extensive catalogue of rights of the defence which, as stated in the Guide, seem to go far beyond the internationally established standard.\n\nIn practice, however, recovery rates remain modest in relation to the volume of criminal assets generated in and flowing through the region. The best practices guide argues that a lack of effective implementation of existing laws partially explains the poor performance. The quality of implementation is influenced by political, economic and social interests. These are not necessarily addressed in the guide, which limits itself to technical and legal issues. \n\nHowever, the guide proposes some concepts and comparative practices that have the modest objective of guiding national authorities in applying this indispensable tool.\n\n### 5\\. What are success factors and challenges?\n\nIn many Latin American countries, non-conviction based forfeiture is only taking its first baby steps. But from a Darwinian perspective of law – i.e. survival of the fittest – I observe that the laws that thrive are those that align with international standards and the constitutional rights of the countries that adopt them. In other words, those laws that develop around recognised global standards and practices but that are also designed to work in specific local contexts. \n\nSince 2020, together with my colleagues and many passionate and competent local partners, I have implemented programmes promoting non-conviction based forfeiture laws in the region. That experience has helped me to see that there is a group of countries that have what we can call a “European” approach to the issue, and whose laws apply only in a narrow set of scenarios.\n\nOthers have more hard-hitting practices that evoke the laws used in countries such as the United States, and have transposed common law practices and principles into civil law frameworks without further reflection. Despite an increase in asset recovery rates, in many cases this has led to distortions and challenges, which are partially explored in the guide.\n\n### 6\\. What does the guide tell us about non-conviction based forfeiture in international cases?\n\nInternational asset recovery is a very different animal from domestic asset recovery and has political implications.\n\nThat said, since 2014 several Latin American countries have tried to pierce the once impenetrable veil of the European financial system with non-conviction based forfeiture procedures. Switzerland and then Luxembourg were the first European countries to accept these laws as valid, in particular in relation to decisions based on Extinción de dominio. Today, almost all countries accept provisional measures based on these laws and some can directly enforce the resulting decisions.\n\nEven if the practice of enforcing non-conviction based forfeiture judgments is not abundant, we hope that the new standards adopted by the FATF on this matter will help to accelerate international asset recovery.\n\n### 7\\. The guide emphasises the need to align laws with international human rights standards. Why?\n\nIn my opinion, this is fundamental. It is inconceivable that the ideals of justice can be achieved to the detriment of human rights.\n\nRather than a random matter left to the discretion of states, respecting human rights in the adoption of non-conviction based forfeiture laws is an international treaty obligation. Most countries adhere to the so-called _control of conventionality_ doctrine, i.e. the obligation to align any domestic legal instrument or practice with binding rules arising from international treaties such as the American Convention of Human Rights. This presupposes that the adoption of any domestic rule and practice on non-conviction based forfeiture must respect human rights and the practice of human rights courts. This is a condition _sine qua non_ of any asset recovery law.\n\nThe guide cites two examples of setbacks to the use of non-conviction based forfeiture laws in the region on the basis of human rights deficits. We can agree or disagree with the premises used by the countries’ High Courts to reach their conclusions. But what is clear is that (a lack of consideration for) human rights can also play a paralysing role. This challenge is vividly illustrated in Peru right now, where the Ombudsman has [filed a claim](https:\u002F\u002Flarepublica.pe\u002Fpolitica\u002Fjudiciales\u002F2024\u002F08\u002F08\u002Fdefensor-del-pueblo-josue-gutierrez-quiere-traerse-abajo-la-ley-de-extincion-de-dominio-tribunal-constitucional-691474) against the use of non-conviction based forfeiture with the Constitutional Tribunal on the grounds that it could violate the right to property and the principle of the presumption of innocence.\n\nOn a more positive note, a human rights lens can enhance the application of this type of law, especially in the context of international cooperation.\n\n*   On the one hand, more attention to human rights brings more legitimacy and acceptance to laws and therefore better recovery rates.\n*   On the other hand, a human rights lens also offers national legislators the ability to adopt more incisive standards when there are, for example, elements of organised crime or other exceptional conditions that make the application of some human rights more flexible. \n\n### 8\\. How does the guide help navigate the human rights topic in practice?\n\nAs the guide explains through a study of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, the issue is constantly evolving. The guide provides Latin American legislators and practitioners with examples of how to develop the human rights approach in a clearer way and enables them to critically review concrete non-conviction based forfeiture cases in various parts of the world. It emphasises two human rights that are central to non-conviction based forfeiture: the right to property and the right to a fair trial.\n\nThis will be enormously beneficial in ensuring that new or revised non-conviction based forfeiture laws in Latin America are in line with the updated FATF Recommendations. The guide advocates for the adoption of laws that are in harmony with human rights principles and specifies that their international enforcement is a recognised standard. Similarly, the interpretative notes to the revised FATF Recommendations 4 and 38 – and the very coherence of the FATF system – indicate that the respect for human rights is fundamental to the adoption and application of these laws.\n\nThe human rights perspective is likely to be an important element in the forthcoming fifth round of FATF Mutual Evaluations in GAFILAT countries, where the technical compliance and effectiveness of these laws with FATF standards will be under the microscope.\n\n### Learn more\n\n*   See the [_Guía de Buenas Prácticas sobre Extinción de Dominio y Decomiso no Basado en Condena_](https:\u002F\u002Fcopolad.eu\u002Fwp-content\u002Fuploads\u002F2024\u002F07\u002FCOPOLAD_Publicaciones_Guia_de_Buenas_Practicas_sobre_Extincion_de_Dominio.pdf)_._\n*   Read a related blog by Oscar Solórzano: [FATF seeks to change the landscape of international asset recovery: what this means for Latin America](\u002F\u002F\u002FFATF%20seeks%20to%20change%20the%20landscape%20of%20international%20asset%20recovery\u002F%20what%20this%20means%20for%20Latin%20America).","2024-08-08","new-gafilat-guide-why-asset-recovery-laws-need-to-align-with-human-rights-and-other-international-standards-2662","New GAFILAT guide: Why asset recovery laws need to align with human rights and other international standards","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F3af4fdb5-27e3-4ebb-8261-dffe69341682?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[265,266,267,268,269,270,271,272,273,274,275,276,277,278,279],7100,7101,7102,7103,7104,7105,7106,7107,7108,7109,7110,7111,7112,7113,7114,[87],[17,91],[283],{"tags_id":284},{"id":285,"name":286},1379,"Non-conviction based forfeiture",2662,[95],[17,91],[291],1105,[],[100],[],"2024-08-08T16:01:40.000Z","2026-05-29T22:22:30.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fnew-gafilat-guide-why-asset-recovery-laws-need-to-align-with-human-rights-and-other-international-standards-2662",{"id":300,"body":301,"status":6,"type":10,"date":302,"slug":303,"title":304,"image":305,"countries":306,"topic":307,"activity":308,"tags":309,"nid":310,"topics":311,"activities":312,"authors":313,"images":314,"websites":21,"area":21,"programme":21,"language":22,"translations":315,"translation_of":21,"user_created":40,"date_created":316,"user_updated":41,"date_updated":317,"content":318,"link":319},10582,"_A breakout session at the [9th Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptoassets](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002F9crc) focused on blockchain intelligence standards and interoperability – an issue that is becoming ever more critical for all who seek to prevent and combat the illicit use of virtual assets for financial crime._\n\n_Breakout leader [Bernhard Haslhofer](https:\u002F\u002Fbernhardhaslhofer.info\u002F) of the Complexity Science Hub Vienna explains the challenge below, and why the breakout represents a promising step towards the co-development of open standards in this domain._\n\nThe absence of standardisation and interoperability among blockchain intelligence tools has emerged as a critical challenge for all stakeholders working on preventing and countering financial crime.\n\nIncompatibilities manifest across multiple dimensions: data formats vary between platforms, identical concepts are described using different terminologies, computational methods such as address clustering follow divergent approaches, and user interfaces lack consistency.\n\nConsequently, problems include:\n\n*   Investigators work with isolated tool ecosystems with no systematic mechanisms for connecting investigations across platforms. This hinders inter-agency and cross-border cooperation.\n*   Prosecutors face problems demonstrating the reliability, admissibility and validity of blockchain evidence in court, in the absence of court-proof forensic procedures and standardised methods (in contrast to DNA analysis, for example).\n*   Judges in court proceedings involving blockchain intelligence currently rely on case-by-case testimonies from tool providers or expert witnesses. This creates resource-intensive judicial processes and lacks consistent interpretation across cases.\n*   Regulators and supervisors for anti-money laundering and counter financing of terrorism (AML\u002FCFT) use inconsistent blockchain intelligence methodologies and typologies to monitor for suspicious transaction patterns and conduct risk profiling.\n*   Training and certification are also at stake. The field lacks independent qualification standards, allowing unqualified practitioners to operate in the field and undermining professional credibility across the domain.\n\nThis situation reflects a typical pattern in emerging technology domains. Historical parallels exist across industries. For example, electrical systems evolved from incompatible regional standards to interoperable networks through adapter technology. Word processing software transitioned from proprietary formats to systems supporting cross-platform document exchange, without capitalising on the strengths of individual tools.\n\nAs blockchain intelligence transitions from an emerging field to an established professional domain, adopting similar standardisation approaches becomes necessary to ensure long-term viability and effectiveness.\n\n### A promising step towards collaboration\n\nAt the 2025 9th Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptoassets organised by Europol, the Basel Institute on Governance and UNODC, we convened a workshop on creating harmonised standards for blockchain intelligence. The session assembled expertise from multiple domains: existing standardisation initiatives by INTERPOL and the [Global Coalition to Fight Financial Crime](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.gcffc.org\u002F), legal scholarship and practice, and operational perspectives from both analytics providers and cryptocurrency exchanges.\n\nIn addition to participants from legal and academic backgrounds, we had strong industry representation including blockchain analytics firms and cryptoasset exchanges. This ensured technical feasibility considerations informed the discussion.\n\nThe workshop addressed four critical components:\n\n*   Defining the technical scope by identifying specific components and processes requiring standardisation across blockchain intelligence tools and workflows.\n*   Outlining the legal and regulatory framework, including jurisdictional considerations, data handling protocols and compliance requirements.\n*   Mapping stakeholders whose participation is essential for standard adoption and implementation.\n*   Developing a concrete implementation pathway from initial agreement through pilot implementation to deployed, operational and open standards.\n\n### Technical scope\n\nThe discussion identified interoperability challenges across multiple technical layers. Immediate opportunities include:\n\n*   standardised data formats for attribution tags enabling third-party dataset integration;\n*   unified terminologies to eliminate semantic conflicts across platforms; and\n*   standardised investigation formats allowing transaction graph sharing without exposing proprietary attribution data.\n\nThese standards would provide direct operational benefits while respecting competitive boundaries between tool providers. For criminal prosecutions or asset recovery proceedings, they would also support the documentation of attribution tag provenance with a clear chain of custody and evidence classification.\n\nAddress clustering on UTXO chains such as Bitcoin presents greater complexity. Applied computational methods such as address clustering must provide transparent justification for grouping addresses into single entities. Yet experts noted significant variation in clustering results across tools and limited external verification capabilities. Providers meanwhile emphasised that computational methods constitute intellectual property, though accessible for regulatory scrutiny.\n\nParticipants agreed that initial standardisation efforts should prioritise readily implementable solutions, with any framework accounting for economic incentives that protect proprietary intelligence from competitors.\n\n> ### What would standards look like?\n> \n> Open standards for blockchain intelligence would be technical in nature but practical in impact. Examples of successful open standards in other domains include:\n> \n> *   [IETF RFC standards](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.ietf.org\u002Fprocess\u002Frfcs\u002F) describing internet technologies, protocols, and procedures\n> *   [W3C Web Standards](https:\u002F\u002Fwww.w3.org\u002Fstandards) ensuring a consistent and harmonious digitally connected world. They are implemented in browsers, blogs, search engines, and other software that power our experience on the web.\n> *   [STIX and TAXII](https:\u002F\u002Foasis-open.github.io\u002Fcti-documentation\u002F) are industry standards for sharing cyber threat intelligence.\n\n### Stakeholder participation and incentives\n\nThe successful development and implementation of standards require engagement from at least three stakeholder groups:\n\n*   Blockchain intelligence providers must contribute to the standardisation process and implement them within their platforms.\n*   User communities, including law enforcement agencies, financial regulators, cryptocurrency exchanges and financial institutions, must articulate operational needs and validation criteria.\n*   Technical experts provide methodological guidance to ensure standards are robust, implementable, and account for current capabilities as well as future scalability.\n\nIncentive structures differ across stakeholders. Tool providers benefit from meeting expressed user requirements. Establishing technically grounded standards through bottom-up consensus would also pre-empt potentially impractical top-down regulatory mandates.\n\nUsers gain operational autonomy and reduced vendor lock-in. This enables investigative continuity across platforms and organisational flexibility in tool selection, as well as enhanced reliability and sharing of blockchain intelligence data.\n\n### Next steps and learn more\n\nParticipants agreed that continued discussion must translate into concrete action, prioritising readily implementable solutions while considering incentive structures across all stakeholder groups. Follow-up steps will be announced in due course. Meanwhile:\n\n*   See the joint press release from the [9th Global Conference on Criminal Finances and Cryptoassets](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fnews\u002Fglobal-experts-advance-joint-fight-against-crypto-enabled-crime), including links to recordings from public sessions.\n*   Read a Q&A with Vincent Danjean, Head of INTERPOL’s Cyberspace and New Technologies Laboratory, on efforts to enhance the [quality of blockchain intelligence](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fblog\u002Fsmarter-blockchain-investigations-insights-interpol).\n*   Learn more about the [concept and use of blockchain intelligence](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fblog\u002Fsetting-global-standards-blockchain-intelligence-idea-reality) and why professional standards are needed.\n*   Need the basics? Check out the Basel Institute's [introductory courses on blockchain: crypto investigation and AML compliance](https:\u002F\u002Fbaselgovernance.org\u002Fcrypto-aml-training).","2025-11-24","developing-blockchain-intelligence-standards-and-interoperability-a-critical-need-to-fight-financial-crime-in-the-digital-age-2879","Developing blockchain intelligence standards and interoperability: a critical need to fight financial crime in the digital age","https:\u002F\u002Fbg24.baselgovernance.org\u002Fcms\u002Fapi\u002Fassets\u002F0abcdf39-2cbe-462b-a1b2-74fbe836dc7c?width=1000&height=650&format=webp&quality=80",[],[87],[17,90],[],2879,[95],[17,90],[],[],[],"2025-11-24T11:01:40.000Z","2026-05-29T22:22:38.000Z",[],"\u002Fresources\u002Fnews\u002Fdeveloping-blockchain-intelligence-standards-and-interoperability-a-critical-need-to-fight-financial-crime-in-the-digital-age-2879",{"left":321,"top":321,"width":322,"height":322,"rotate":321,"vFlip":323,"hFlip":323,"body":324},0,20,false,"\u003Cpath fill=\"currentColor\" fill-rule=\"evenodd\" d=\"M17 10a.75.75 0 0 1-.75.75H5.612l4.158 3.96a.75.75 0 1 1-1.04 1.08l-5.5-5.25a.75.75 0 0 1 0-1.08l5.5-5.25a.75.75 0 1 1 1.04 1.08L5.612 9.25H16.25A.75.75 0 0 1 17 10\" clip-rule=\"evenodd\"\u002F>",1780868848193]