On The Perfecting The System Of Crime Recovery Of Illicit Money And Goods

In 2004, the "Private Property Rights" was first written into the Constitution, and this is the first confirmation of private property status in the Constitution, establishing the basic rights of private property rights as citizens.Whereby the fundamental rights of citizens was able to complete supplement, it seems to imply Citizen Property Protection about to open a magnificent chapter.However, it did not, a time of rapid development of market economy, accompanied packaged in a variety of gorgeous coat investment guarantee companies have mushroomed to emerge, but due to the broken capital chain section and the collapse of the phenomenon have occurred, massive and frequent the crime of illegal fund-raising in the capital market can be described as jittery.In the face of fund-raising by the beautiful blueprint outlined lure under a flood of investors in its only remaining pension money, money and even cure coffin money for investment, most people invest in this high-sounding lose everything go and resigned.Thus highlighting the flaws of "stolen goods" regime.Since presenting legislative diversification effect level is not uniform, and the "stolen goods" in practice the judiciary different operating norms, their own ways, and so many objective reasons for lack of experience in handling cases, it is the victim of property damage can not be effectively protected, as well as various illegal deposits from the public, financial fraud and other criminal acts such increasingly rampant root causes." perfect not only deprive criminal activities vested stolen goods regime, but also to achieve the punishment of crime and the protection of property rights of citizens of double effect, without property rights of victims as decoration. Ironically, the case broke, but the victim did not pay for the property.Moment, "stolen goods can not" property rights protection has become a citizen during an impassable moat, improve the "stolen goods" system offers the possibility of a "cure" for us to protect the property rights of citizens.This article will be based on the current situation, in order to compare the pros and cons of foreign legislation, analysis of the criminal proceedings to recover the stolen money difficulties and shortcomings of the system and improve China "stolen goods" system.This paper is divided into four parts to elaborate:The first part, "stolen goods" system overview.This part of the analysis of what is "stolen goods", and "stolen goods" system defined in the criminal proceedings, understand correct generalization,analysis "recovery" and "recovered" the essential difference, and that is the core of the system were stolen money interpretation,clarify the relationship between the proceeds of crime and the proceeds of crime, proceeds of crime, the amount of crime, a glimpse of "stolen goods" of the existing system defects.The second part, from China's "stolen goods" traditional development system to transition commence special confiscation procedures, the introduction of common law, civil law system of property confiscation, and forfeiture of special procedures were compared.Analysis of the difference with "stolen goods" system and foreign confiscation regime characterized by the presence of the respective analyzes of special confiscation of inadequate procedures.The third part, elaborated China's "stolen goods" system mainly of controversial issues from a series of "chasing dirty" architecture chaos caused analyzes under three major difficulties in the system, including the lack of clearly defined in the law, illicit money and goods acquired in good faith on the issue of the applicability of the lack of guidance; protection of property claims of victims of the shelf, "first punishment queen people" became the judiciary in dealing with criminal cases the main theme; the lack of specialized property custodian system, such proceeds of crime and custody process is not sufficiently transparent, rigorous, can not protect the legitimate rights and interests of stakeholders.The fourth part of the problems put forward a sound recommendation,Including "stolen goods" system to build a more complete system, the exclusion of the disposal proceeds of crime acquired in good faith to exclude application of the system,were doubts theoretically, get rid of "first punishment queen people" superstitious practices,rebuilding mode civil and criminal litigation in hand, and suggested that the property custodian of civil law applicable reference system,effectively protect the legitimate property rights of victims.