The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
22
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
TYPE
Original Research
PAGE NO.
22-30
10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue03-04
OPEN ACCESS
SUBMITED
20 January 2025
ACCEPTED
18 February 2025
PUBLISHED
17 March 2025
VOLUME
Vol.07 Issue03 2025
CITATION
Nasrullaev Saidmurod Rashidovich. (2025). Legal basis of prosecutorial
supervision of the investigation of crimes for the legalization of proceeds
derived from criminal activity. The American Journal of Political Science
Law and Criminology, 7(03), 22
–
30.
https://doi.org/10.37547/tajpslc/Volume07Issue03-04
COPYRIGHT
© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.
Legal basis of
prosecutorial supervision
of the investigation of
crimes for the legalization
of proceeds derived from
criminal activity
Nasrullaev Saidmurod Rashidovich
An independent applicant of the Law Enforcement Academy of the
Republic of Uzbekistan, Uzbekistan, Tashkent city
Abstract:
The article analyzes the norms of legislative
documents regulating prosecutor's supervision over the
investigation of crimes related to the legalization of
proceeds from criminal activities. Specifically, the
United Nations Conventions, FATF recommendations,
and other international legal norms are examined, with
a comparative legal analysis against national legislative
norms.
Proposals
are
made
regarding
the
implementation of international legal norms into
national legislation.
Keywords:
UN Conventions, FATF recommendations,
international standards, proceeds from criminal
activities, property, property forfeiture, confiscation,
principal crime, predicate crime, evidence gathering.
Introduction:
Money laundering is becoming a global
problem for international financial systems.
It is worth emphasizing that this globalization creates
opportunities for criminals to hide criminally obtained
proceeds, property, give a legal appearance to the origin
of illegal proceeds, and transfer it from one country to
another.
According to the International Monetary Fund, the
amount of criminal proceeds obtained through various
crimes annually amounts to 2-5 percent of the gross
domestic product of the world's countries, that is, this
figure is from 800 billion US dollars to 2 trillion US
dollars.
If we analyze the amount of illegal proceeds that is being
legalized around the world, the fact that this figure
exceeds the annual proceeds of countries such as
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
23
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
Germany, Japan, Great Britain, France, and Spain
requires the international community to take strict
measures to fight against the legalization of proceeds
from criminal activities, to identify illegally obtained
funds, and to transfer them to the state.
According to the results of the typologies developed
for the legalization of proceeds from criminal activities,
it is known that a certain part of the proceeds obtained
through criminal means is most often transferred to
other countries, and then reintroduced into the
country through international payment systems, giving
their appearance a legal appearance.
Recent studies have shown that the main schemes are
the registration of assets in the names of third parties
in exchange for illegal proceeds, their inclusion in the
authorized capital of other business entities, and the
subsequent receipt of additional profits through the
sale of these assets and funds.
From the analysis of typologies and statistical data, we
can see that due to the concealment of criminal
proceeds by criminals using the above-mentioned
methods, it is becoming increasingly difficult to identify
the true sources of these proceeds, and the shadow
economy is becoming increasingly important in giving
illegal proceeds a legal appearance.
Therefore, the international community has a need to
create legal foundations for combating money
laundering and the creation of effective mechanisms
for identifying, confiscating and transferring criminal
proceeds to state ownership.
The first international norms in this regard "were
reflected in the UN Convention on Combating Illicit
Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances".
This Convention was ratified by the Resolution No. 32-
I of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated
February 24, 1995.
For example, Article 1 of the Convention defines the
concept
of “proceeds of crime” as any property
obtained or acquired as a direct or indirect result of a
crime.
The Convention requires each country to take such
measures as may be necessary to enable its competent
authorities to identify, trace and seize or confiscate
proceeds of crime, property, funds or other things for
the purpose of subsequent confiscation.
In order to carry out these measures, each country
shall empower its competent authorities to order the
production or seizure of bank, financial or commercial
documents.
In our opinion, these norms established in the
Convention are the first international norms reflecting
the conduct of separate investigative actions on crimes
of criminal activity, which were later further elaborated
in international recommendations and documents. In
particular, “Article 2 of the Strasbourg Convention of the
Council of Europe on the legalization, identification,
seizure and confiscation of the proceeds of crime”
stipulates that each country must take appropriate
measures to confiscate the proceeds of crime,
instrumentalities or property of an amount equivalent
to the value of such proceeds”.
It was also noted that countries should give their
competent authorities the power to ban banking,
financial and other documents in order to confiscate
illegal proceeds, tools and other assets.
This international norm establishes that the competent
authorities
responsible
for
combating
money
laundering shall have the power to obtain information
on bank secrecy, and that countries shall not be
permitted to evade these requirements.
Similarly, Article 4 of this Convention states that “each
country shall consider adopting legislative and other
appropriate measures to enable the use of special
investigative
techniques,
which
may
include
surveillance,
interrogation,
interception
of
telecommunications, access to computer systems and
the production of certain documents, in order to
identify and trace the proceeds of crime and to ensure
the collection of relevant evidence.”
In our opinion, according to the interpretation of the
rule defined in Article 4 of the Strasbourg Convention, it
is said that measures should be taken to identify, search,
and transfer the proceeds of criminal activities to the
state ownership based on criminal procedural
legislation in cases of legalization of proceeds from
criminal activities.
Although the Republic of Uzbekistan has not
participated in the Strasbourg Convention, we agree
with the views of scholars on this issue and consider it a
source of international standards, given its practical
importance in introducing mechanisms for investigating
the legalization of proceeds of criminal activity.
Another international document that defines the
identification, confiscation, and confiscation of
proceeds of crime, as well as the tasks of prosecutors
and investigative bodies in this regard, is the United
Nations (hereinafter referred to as the UN) Convention
against Transnational Organized Crime.
Article 2 of the Convention defines the concepts of
confiscation, seizure, and confiscation of proceeds of
crime, property, and predicate crimes, and Article 6
states that each state shall establish criminal liability for
intentional money laundering, in accordance with the
fundamental principles of its domestic legislation, and
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
24
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
defines the category of crimes of this type.
It is worth noting that Article 7 of the Convention
stipulates that administrative and law enforcement
authorities (including the judicial system, in
accordance with national legislation) combating the
legalization of proceeds from criminal activities shall
have the opportunity to cooperate within the
framework of information exchange at the national
and international levels, and shall establish a financial
intelligence unit, which shall act as a national center for
the collection, analysis and dissemination of
information on possible methods and mechanisms of
legalization of proceeds from criminal activities.
In our opinion, this norm is the first international legal
norm establishing the establishment of a special
authorized div to monitor transactions related to
monetary funds and material assets, and to carry out
financial monitoring.
Similarly, Article 11 of the Convention stipulates the
conduct of criminal prosecution by the authorized
div in cases of legalization of proceeds from criminal
activities, and Article 12 stipulates the rules on
confiscation, seizure and confiscation of proceeds from
criminal activities.
It stipulates that States Parties shall, within the
framework of their domestic legal systems, take
measures to confiscate the proceeds of the offences
established in accordance with the Convention, or
property corresponding to the value of such proceeds,
and property, equipment or other instrumentalities
used or intended for use in the course of the offences.
For this purpose, it is envisaged that states will take
measures to identify, search for, seize the above-
mentioned property, and if the proceeds of crime have
been converted into other property in whole or in part,
to confiscate this property.
The Convention also introduces legal norms on the
confiscation of additional property obtained as a result
of the use of proceeds of crime or the profit or benefit
obtained as a result of the use of this property as well
as criminal proceeds.
In addition, the Convention establishes that the main
purpose of
cooperation
between
competent
authorities and supervisory bodies is to determine:
1) the identity, location, actions taken during the
specified period and the location of other participants
in the commission of crimes;
2) the movement of funds obtained by criminal means
and property acquired as a result of illegal activities;
3) movement of property, equipment or other means
used and intended for use in the commission of such
crimes. The ratification of the Convention by the
Resolution of the Oliy Majlis of the Republic of
Uzbekistan No. 536-II of August 30, 2003 imposed
obligations on the Republic of Uzbekistan to implement
international legal norms into national legislation.
In our opinion, the above norms of the UN Convention
against Transnational Organized Crime are international
legal norms that establish mechanisms for conducting
investigations into money laundering crimes, as well as
methods of information exchange.
Through the above norms, recommendations are made
on the introduction of a system of international
standards for identifying cases of money laundering,
conducting criminal prosecution for this type of crime,
identifying the true owner of funds, and taking
measures to transfer the proceeds of crime to the state.
Then, we will consider the norms of the UN Convention
against Corruption. In particular, Article 23 of this
Convention stipulates that each State Party shall adopt
such legislative and other measures as may be required
to recognize the legalization of money laundering as a
criminal offense in accordance with the fundamental
principles of its domestic legal system.
Also, Article 30 of the Convention stipulates the
restriction of the rights of officials who have committed
these crimes, namely removal from office, and Article 31
stipulates the confiscation and confiscation of proceeds
of crime, as well as the suspension of operations related
to them.
In accordance with these rules, each State shall take
measures to ensure, within the framework of its
domestic legal system, the possibility of confiscating:
a) Proceeds derived from the commission of offences
established in accordance with this Convention, or
property of an equivalent value;
b) Property and equipment used or intended for use in
the commission of an offence.
Each State shall also take appropriate measures to
ensure the possibility of identifying, tracing, temporarily
freezing or confiscating the proceeds of crime for the
purpose of subsequent confiscation.
The accession of the Republic of Uzbekistan to this
Convention has imposed an obligation to bring its
national legislation on the identification, confiscation
and transfer to the State of the proceeds of crime into
line with international legal norms.
In our opinion, the above international legal norms are
considered as one of the main tasks of the bodies
conducting the preliminary investigation, aimed at
determining the scope of their functions, obligations
and powers, to conduct an effective investigation.
Today, "the updated recommendations of the FATF set
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
25
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
the main mechanisms that ensure the effectiveness of
the preliminary investigation bodies on the legalization
of proceeds from criminal activities".
For example, FATF Recommendation 30 sets out the
responsibilities of law enforcement, investigative and
prosecutorial authorities, and specifies the scope of
state bodies responsible for conducting parallel
financial investigations into money laundering,
predicate offences and money laundering offences.
This recommendation requires countries to establish
competent authorities with the power to search, seize
and freeze assets that are or may be subject to
confiscation. The main objectives of conducting
parallel financial investigations into money laundering
cases are:
- search for criminal proceeds, property, confiscate and
ban them if necessary;
- initiation of criminal proceedings in cases of
legalization of proceeds from criminal activity;
- to determine the financial and economic aspects of
the crime, to eliminate transnational crimes, to have
the necessary knowledge on the types and
characteristics of this type of crime;
- collection of evidence in a criminal case.
It is also important to note that the FATF
Recommendations provide general guidance for
various legal systems and law enforcement agencies in
conducting financial investigations. States should
consider incorporating these Recommendations into
their national legislation, taking into account their legal
systems and law enforcement practices.
Also, the functions of the primary investigation bodies,
the authority to access financial and other information,
are prerequisites for combating predicate and money
laundering crimes.
Indeed, based on the analysis of the norms established
in the FATF recommendations, it can be concluded that
the factors ensuring the effectiveness of the system
are the identification of the scale of criminal activity,
the disclosure of criminal connections and groups, the
detection of criminal proceeds that should be
transferred to state ownership, as well as the
collection of evidence confirming the fact of
committing a crime. It should also be noted that the
bodies conducting the preliminary investigation into
cases of legalization of proceeds from criminal
activities must have sufficient material, technical and
human resources to ensure the effectiveness of their
activities.
Thus, FATF Recommendation 31 states that law
enforcement, investigative and prosecutorial bodies
shall have the authority to conduct criminal
prosecution in the investigation of legalization of
proceeds from criminal activities and related predicate
crimes, and to request all documents necessary for use
in the preliminary investigation.
These powers include the compulsory acquisition of
information held by financial institutions, legal entities
and individuals for the purpose of collecting and
examining evidence. Special investigative methods in
this regard also include covert operations, wiretapping,
computer access, and controlled delivery, among other
operational measures.
In addition, bodies conducting parallel financial
investigations should have effective mechanisms in
place to allow for the timely identification of accounts
owned or controlled by individuals or legal entities.
Next, we will focus on the opinions of scholars and
international and national legislative norms on the
concept of predicate or predicate crimes discussed in
the course of the research.
For example, international legal norms, as well as FATF
recommendations, use this concept through the terms
“predicate offense”, “main” or “predicate offense”, and
these crimes are defined as “any act related to the
receipt of cr
iminal proceeds”.
In particular, this term was first used in the UN
Convention against Transnational Organized Crime as
“serious crimes”, which included crimes punishable by
imprisonment for a term of up to four years or a more
severe penalty.
Similarly, the UN Convention against Corruption states
that “predicate offense” means any offense that
constitutes a crime and to which the penalties provided
for in Article 23 of the Convention apply to the proceeds
obtained as a result of such acts.
The FATF recommendations use this term as a
“predicate crime”, and it is noted that this category of
crimes includes all criminal acts, depending on the
criteria of the social danger of the act or the severity of
the punishment, or the approval of a list of such crimes,
or the use of these approaches in combination.
V.I. Glotova, A.U. Albekova, who conducted research on
this issue, define predicate crimes as crimes committed
for the purpose of legalizing criminal proceeds.
E.A. Menshikova also agrees with these scientists and
emphasizes that “predicate crimes are the main
element of the objective side of the subsequent crime.”
M.A. Filatova, similar to the opinion of the above
scientists, also emphasizes that crimes committed for
the purpose of obtaining illegal activity are predicate
crimes, and expresses her views on the breadth of the
scope of crimes.
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
26
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
A.N. Lyaskalo puts forward the view that “a predicate
crime is a logical continuation of the crime of
legalization of money and other property obtained by
criminal means.”
We agree with the views expressed by these scholars
about predicate crimes.
In addition, the term predicate is defined in the FATF
recommendations as “a crime aimed at obtaining
illegal proceeds for the purpose of legaliza
tion.”
Having analyzed the norms of international law and the
results of scientific research by legal scholars, we
emphasize the expediency of using this term as a
predicate crime, while emphasizing the correctness of
the definition given to the concept of a predicate crime
as “a socially dangerous act committed for the purpose
of obtaining criminal proceeds, which is provided for in
the Special Part of the Criminal Code of the Republic of
Uzbekistan, leading to future legalization.”
Based on a comparative analysis of the norms on
conducting preliminary investigations into money
laundering crimes set forth in international legal
instruments, we propose the introduction of the
following mechanisms into national legislation:
–
having the necessary resources,
that is, data sources and qualified personnel, to ensure
the identification, prosecution, and transfer of
criminally obtained proceeds to state ownership;
–
having the authority to carry out the following special
methods in conducting preliminary investigations,
including wiretapping, computer system access, and
controlled delivery.
When analyzing the stages of improving national
legislation on conducting preliminary investigations
into money laundering crimes, it can be noted that,
based on the above-mentioned generally recognized
international norms, the Law of the Republic of
Uzbekistan “On Combating the Legalization of
Proceeds from Criminal Activities, the Financing of
Terrorism and the Financing of Weapons of Mass
Destruction” was initially adopted.
For example, the Law defines the concepts of proceeds
from criminal activity, legalization of proceeds from
criminal activity, material assets or other valuable
property, and freezing of operations.
At the next stage, the adoption of the Law of the
Republic
of Uzbekistan “On Ratification of the
Agreement of the Eurasian Group on Combating the
Legalization of Criminal Proceeds and the Financing of
Terrorism (Moscow, June 16, 2011)” will be of great
importance in the implementation of international
standards in this area into national legislation.
Because the ratification of this agreement obliged
Uzbekistan to fulfill the obligations set forth in the
agreement in combating the legalization of proceeds
from criminal activities.
In order to ensure the implementation of the
agreement, the Law of the Republic of Uzbekistan No
516, in January 15, 2019 "On Amendments and Addenda
to Certain Legislative Acts of the Republic of Uzbekistan"
was adopted, which defined the concept of legalization
of proceeds from criminal activities in a new edition,
brought it into line with the definition given in the
Criminal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal
Code), and expanded the scope of powers of the
specially authorized state div .
In addition, in order to eliminate shortcomings in the
investigation and judicial practice, "On February 11,
2011, the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Republic
of Uzbekistan adopted Resolution No. 1 "On Certain
Issues of Judicial Practice in Cases of Legalization of
Proceeds from Criminal Activities", which introduced
the concept of proceeds from criminal activities and
clarified the criteria for qualifying the act under Article
243 of the Criminal Code.".
For example, the Plenum resolution noted that property
obtained as a result of criminal proceeds should be
considered an object of crime, and after compensation
for material damage caused to an individual or legal
entity as a result of a crime, the remaining part should
be transferred to the state.
Next, we will conduct a comparative analysis of the
current legislative norms in order to study the stages of
development of the national legislative system and the
extent to which it complies with international
standards.
In particular, the adoption of the Law of the Republic of
Uzbekistan “On
investigative activities” established by
international
legal
norms
established
special
investigative methods, namely controlled delivery,
investigative surveillance, wiretapping of telephone and
other devices, which are considered to be methods of
conducting preliminary investigations into crimes of
legalization of proceeds from criminal activities, the
procedure for conducting investigative measures, the
scope of bodies implementing these activities, and their
tasks.
Because investigative measures are one of the effective
means of early detection, prevention and combating
crimes.
It is also worth noting that "materials from investigative
activities may be used as evidence in criminal cases in
accordance with the norms of the Criminal Procedure
Code.".
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
27
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
In this regard, the prosecutor's control is carried out in
the form of permission to conduct search and seizure
activities or in agreement with the prosecutor.
Because, according to Article 16 of the Law, search and
seizure activities that restrict the right to privacy of
residence, correspondence, telephone conversations
and other communications, postal, courier and
telegraph
messages
transmitted
through
communication networks, as well as information about
communications between subscribers or subscriber
devices, information constituting bank secrecy, are
allowed on the basis of the prosecutor's sanction.
Purchase for inspection, controlled acquisition, rapid
surveillance, rapid import, controlled delivery within
the Republic of Uzbekistan, disguised operations, rapid
experimentation are carried out on the basis of a
decision approved by the head of the div carrying out
search and seizure activities. Purchase for inspection,
controlled acquisition and controlled delivery are
carried out in agreement with the prosecutor.
Based on the results of consideration of the submitted
materials, the prosecutor shall authorize the conduct
of the relevant search and seizure measure or shall
refuse to conduct it with justification, indicating this in
the decision. If the prosecutor refuses to authorize the
conduct of the search and seizure measure, the div
carrying out the search and seizure activity shall have
the right to appeal such decision to a higher
prosecutor.
According to R. Zhubrin, “search and seizure activity as
one of the methods of identifying proceeds from crime
has wide possibilities”.
V. Karimov emphasized that "during the course of
investigative activities, information should be collected
about where, when, and what signs of a crime were
detected, the person who committed the crime,
witnesses to the crime, and the location of objects and
documents that could serve as material evidence.".
In our opinion, preliminary investigation bodies may
issue instructions to bodies carrying out operational-
search activities on criminal cases, search for persons
who committed them, and conduct certain
investigative actions. For this purpose, as a result of
operational-search
measures
carried
out
by
operational-search bodies, operational information
can be obtained about funds obtained through
criminal means, methods of their legalization, location,
and guilty persons.
The main goal of the preliminary investigation is to
collect evidence confirming the commission of this
crime, and the procedural procedure for collecting and
strengthening evidence is established in the Criminal
Procedure Code.
Control over the implementation of laws by inquiry and
preliminary investigation bodies is established in
Articles 382-388 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
which include:
–
requesting from inquiry and preliminary investigation
bodies and bodies carrying out pre-investigation or
search and rescue activities documents, materials and
other information on the progress of search and rescue,
inquiry, preliminary investigation cases on committed
crimes in order to verify cases;
–
checking at least once a month the extent to which the
requirements of the law on the acceptance, registration
and resolution of applications and information on
committed or planned crimes are being implemented;
–
canceling unlawful and unfounded decisions of inquiry
officers and investigators, as well as officials of the div
carrying out pre-investigation checks;
–
to investigate crimes, to select, change or cancel a
measure of restraint, to file a petition for the imposition
of an additional prohibition (restriction) on house
arrest, to determine the nature of the crime, to involve
in the case as an accused, to perform certain
investigative actions and to give written instructions on
the search for persons who committed the crime;
–
to file a petition with the court for the application of a
measure of restraint in the form of arrest or house
arrest or to issue additional prohibition (restriction) on
house arrest, or to file a petition with the court for the
extension of the term of detention in custody or house
arrest;
–
to file a petition with the court for the exhumation of
a corpse, for the seizure of postal and telegraphic items,
or to file a petition with the court for the preliminary
recording of the testimonies of witnesses and victims
(civil plaintiffs);
–
to conclude an agreement with the suspect or accused
on the admission of guilt in accordance with the
established procedure;
–
to issue instructions to bodies carrying out pre-
investigation or search activities on the execution of
decisions on the detention, forced surrender, search of
persons, the execution of a court ruling on the
application of a precautionary measure in the form of
arrest or house arrest, as well as on taking necessary
measures to solve crimes and identify persons who
committed crimes in cases under the control of a
prosecutor or investigator of the prosecutor's office;
–
to participate in an inquiry, preliminary investigation,
personally perform certain investigative actions in any
case or carry out the investigation in full;
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
28
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
–
to conduct searches, intercept telephone and other
telecommunications devices and obtain information
transmitted through them, to conduct search and
seizure measures that restrict the right to privacy,
correspondence,
telephone
and
other
communications, postal, courier and telegraph
messages
transmitted
through
communication
networks, and to obtain information about
communications between subscribers or subscriber
devices, as well as, in cases provided for by law, to
allow other actions of an official of the pre-
investigation div, an inquiry officer and an
investigator;
–
to extend the terms of preliminary investigation and
inquiry;
–
to return cases to the inquiry and preliminary
investigation bodies with an instruction to conduct
additional investigation;
–
to remove the inquiry officer or investigator from
continuing the inquiry or preliminary investigation if
they have committed a violation of the law during the
investigation of the case;
–
to initiate criminal proceedings or refuse to initiate
them,
to terminate or suspend the proceedings of cases;
–
to give consent to the investigator or inquiry officer
to terminate the case; to approve the indictment,
indictment or decision, and to refer cases to court.
It should be noted that the instructions of the
prosecutor to the bodies of inquiry and preliminary
investigation and to the bodies carrying out pre-
investigation or operational search activities in
accordance with the procedure established by this
Code, related to the conduct of pre-investigation
checks, the initiation of cases and the investigation, are
mandatory for these bodies.
In addition, the Code of Criminal Procedure establishes
the issues to be resolved in a criminal case with an
indictment or an indictment, as well as decisions to be
taken on precautionary measures.
According to the explanations given in the Resolution
No. 26 of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of
December 27, 2016 “On judicial practice on the
application of legislation on compensation for property
damage caused as a result of a crime”, “property
belonging to the suspect and the accused, which is in
the possession of third parties, may be seized, if during
the course of the case there are sufficient grounds to
consider that this property actually belongs to the
suspect or the accused.”.
This decision of the Plenum of the Supreme Court
specifically outlines the criteria that should be taken
into account in the process of proving guilt by the
preliminary investigation div in cases of money
laundering, and is an important legal basis, since it
establishes the establishment of effective prosecutorial
control over this activity. It is worth highlighting the
Order of the Prosecutor General of the Republic of
Uzbekistan No.
129 dated February 22, 2016 “On
effective ensuring of the rule of law and protection of
the rights and freedoms of the individual in the fight
against crime, inquiry, preliminary investigation and
operational search activities” as the main source
determining the procedure for exercising prosecutorial
control in the conduct of preliminary investigations in
cases of money laundering.
Because this order defined the duties and powers of the
prosecutor in conducting a preliminary investigation.
Subsequently, in order to increase the efficiency of the
activities of law enforcement agencies conducting
parallel financial investigations into money laundering
crimes and to form a uniform practice in this area, the
Prosecutor General, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the
State Security Service and the Chairman of the State
Customs
Committee
approved
the
Additional
Instruction “On the Procedure for Studying the Financial
Aspects of Criminal Activities in the Process of
Conducting Search, Pre-Investigation, Inquiry and
Preliminary Investigation Activities” on May 20, 2021.
This Additional Instruction regulates the legalization of
proceeds from criminal activities, the increase in the
effectiveness of the investigation and detection of
crimes related to predicate crimes and money
laundering, the collection and consolidation of
evidence, the identification and seizure of criminal
proceeds and other property for subsequent transfer to
state ownership.
Subsequently, by the decision of the Prosecutor
General, the Chairman of the State Security Service, the
Minister of Internal Affairs and the Chairman of the
State Customs Committee of October 29, 2021, the
Regulation “On the Procedure for Conducting a Parallel
Financial Investigation to Identify Cases of Legalization
of Proceeds from Criminal Activities and Financing of
Terrorism” was approved.
This Regulation establishes the procedure for
conducting a parallel financial investigation to identify
cases of legalization of proceeds from criminal activities
and financing of terrorism, persons associated with
them, and property transferred to state ownership
during operational search, pre-investigation and
investigative actions.
It is noteworthy that in recent years, effective work has
been carried out in our country to prevent and eliminate
money laundering crimes, as well as to establish the
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
29
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
procedure for conducting preliminary investigations.
In this regard, a number of training and methodological
events are being organized by international experts, in
particular the Eurasian Group on Combating Money
Laundering and the Financing of Terrorism (hereinafter
referred to as the EAG) , the UN Office on Drugs and
Crime, and the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe, on the procedure for
conducting preliminary investigations into money
laundering
crimes
and
establishing
effective
interdepartmental cooperation in this regard.
However, according to the analysis of current
legislation, it can be observed that the concept,
purpose
and
essence
of
parallel
financial
investigations, as well as the implementation
mechanisms established by international legal norms,
in particular the FATF recommendations, have not
been implemented in the legislation, are regulated by
departmental documents, and the requirements of
international standards are not fully implemented,
which negatively affects the effectiveness of the
national system. Another scientist who conducted
research in this regard, Ch. Sumati, assesses the
implementation of international legal norms on
parallel financial investigations, in particular the FATF
recommendations, into national legislation as a factor
ensuring the timely identification and transfer of
proceeds from crime to state ownership.
The results of the study show that the bodies
conducting the preliminary investigation do not know
how to conduct effective investigative actions, that a
unified methodology has not been developed in this
regard, that the financial aspects of criminal activity
are not studied, that the amount of recovery of
damage caused by economic and corruption crimes is
decreasing, and that the number of acquittals in this
type of criminal cases is increasing.
In our opinion, in order to fulfill the international
obligations of the Republic of Uzbekistan, identify
criminally obtained proceeds, and ensure its transfer
to state ownership, it is advisable to implement
international legal norms and recommendations on
combating money laundering crimes into national
legislation.
In particular, it is advisable to introduce amendments
to the Criminal Procedure Code, as well as to the norms
determining the powers of the prosecutor, the tasks of
prosecutorial supervision in the investigation of money
laundering crimes.
REFERENCES
Рекомендации ФАТФ: Международные стандарты
по
противодействию
отмыванию
денег,
финансированию терроризма и финансированию
распространения оружия массового уничтожения. //
[Электрон
манба].
URL:
https://eurasiangroup.org/files/uploads/files/FATF_Re
commendations_2023_rus.pdf.
Ўзбекистон Республикасининг қонуни «Жиноий
фаолиятдан
олинган
даромадларни
легаллаштиришга, терроризмни молиялаштиришга
ва
оммавий
қирғин
қуролини
тарқатишни
молиялаштиришга қарши курашиш тўғрисида»
26.08.2004
йилдаги
660
-II-
сон
//
[Электрон
манба].URL: https://lex.uz/acts/284542.
Отчет взаимной оценки Республики Узбекистан.
Евразийская
группа
по
противодействию
легализации
преступных
доходов
и
финансированию терроризма. // [Электрон манба].
URL:
https://eurasiangroup.org/files/uploads/files/MER_Uz
bekistan_2022_rus.pdf
Обзор ООН. Управление по наркотикам и
преступностью.
Электрон
манба:
https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/money-
laundering/overview.html.
Государственный бюджет по странам. Электрон
манба:
https://ru.tradingeconomics.com/country
-
list/government-budget-value.
Типологические проекты ЕАГ. Электрон манба:
https://eurasiangroup.org/ru/eag-typology-projects.
Trade-based
Money
Laundering:
Trends
and
Developments, FATF
–
Egmont Group (2020), FATF,
Paris,
France.
Электрон
манба:
https://eurasiangroup.org/files/uploads/files/other_do
cs/FATF%20docs/Trade-Based-Money-Laundering-
Trends-and-Developments_rus.pdf.
Бирлашган Миллатлар Ташкилотининг 1988 йил 20
декабрдаги “Гиёҳвандлик воситалари ва психотроп
моддаларнинг ноқонуний айланмасига қарши кураш
тўғрисида”ги
Конвенцияси.
Электрон
манба:
https://lex.uz/ru/docs/2614140.
Ўзбекистон Республикаси Олий Мажлисининг 1995
йил 24 февралдаги “Гиёҳвандлик воситалари ва
психотроп моддаларни
ғайриқонуний равишда
муомалага киритишга қарши кураш тўғрисидаги
Бирлашган
Миллатлар
Ташкилотининг
Конвенциясига қўшилиш ҳақида”ги 32
-I-
сон Қарори.
Электрон манба: https://lex.uz/ru/docs/2620830.
Европа Кенгашининг 1990 йилдаги “Жиноий
фаолиятдан олинган
даромадларни легаллаштириш,
аниқлаш, олиб қўйиш ва мусодара қилиш ҳақида”ги
Страсбург
Конвенцияси.
Электрон
манба:
https://rm.coe.int/168007bd4a.
Коленко Е.В. Ответственность за получение взятки:
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
30
https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajpslc
The American Journal of Political Science Law and Criminology
перспективы
совершенствования
уголовного
законодательства Республики Узбекистан с учетом
международных стандартов. дисс. ... учен. степ.
PhD. ТГЮУ. Ташкент. 2023.
Бирлашган Миллатлар Ташкилотининг 2000 йил 15
ноябрдаги “Трансмиллий уюшган жиноятчиликка
қарши Конвенцияси” (Ўзбекистон Республикаси
халқаро шартномалари тўлами, 2004 й., № 1).
Ўзбекистон Республикаси Олий Мажлисининг 2003
йил
30
августдаги
“Бирлашган
Миллатлар
Ташкилотининг
Трансмиллий
уюшган
жиноятчиликка
қарши
Конвенциясини
ратификация қилиш тўғрисида”ги 536
-II-
сон Қарори
(Ўзбекистон Республикаси Олий
Мажлисининг
Ахборотномаси, 2003 й., 9
-10-
сон).
Бирлашган Миллатлар Ташкилотининг 2003 йил 31
октябрдаги Коррупцияга қарши Конвенцияси
(Ўзбекистон Республикаси халқаро шартномалари
тўплами, 2008 й., 3
-4-
сон).
Ўзбекистон Республикасининг 2008 йил 7 июлдаги
“Бирлашган
Миллатлар
Ташкилотининг
Коррупцияга қарши Конвенциясига (Нью
-
йорк,
2003 йил 31 октябрь) Ўзбекистон Республикасининг
қўшилиши тўғрисида”ги ЎРҚ
-158-
сон Қонуни.
Қонунчилик
маълумотлари
миллий
базаси,
19.11.2021 й., 03/21/729/1064
-
сон.
Ўзбекистон Республикасининг 2011 йил 13
декабрдаги
“Жиноий
даромадларни
легаллаштиришга
ва
терроризмни
молиялаштиришга қарши курашиш бўйича Евросиё
гуруҳи тўғрисидаги битимни (Москва, 2011 йил 16
июнь) ратификация қилиш ҳақида”ги ЎРҚ
-307-
сон
Қонуни
(Ўзбекистон
Республикаси
қонун
ҳужжатлари тўплами, 2011 й., 50
-
сон, 509
-
модда).
Ўзбекистон Республикасининг 2019 йил 15
январдаги “Иқтисодий жиноятларга ва оммавий
қирғин қуролини тарқатишни молиялаштиришга
қарши
курашиш
механизмлари
такомиллаштирилиши
муносабати
билан
Ўзбекистон
Республикасининг
айрим
қонун
ҳужжатларига ўзгартиш ва қўшимчалар киритиш
тўғрисида”ги ЎРҚ
-516-
сон Қонуни. Электрон манба:
https://lex.uz/ru/docs/4163506.
Ўзбекистон Республикаси Олий суд Пленумининг
2011 йил 11 февралдаги “Жиноий фаолиятдан
олинган даромадларни легаллаштиришга оид
ишлар бўйича суд амалиётининг айрим масалалари
тўғрисида”ги 1
-
сон қарори. Электрон манба:
https://lex.uz/docs/1766419.
Ўзбекистон Республикасининг 2012 йил 25
декабрдаги
“Тезкор
-
қидирув
фаолияти
тўғрисида”ги ЎРҚ
-344-
сон Қонуни. Электрон манба:
https://lex.uz/docs/2107763.
Жубрин Р.В. Основы профилактики легализации
преступных доходов: автореф. дис. …д
-
ра юрид.
наук. Акад. Генер. прок. РФ. –
М., 2013.
Каримов В. “Тезкор
-
қидирув фаолияти”. Дарслик.
Тошкент. Lesson press. 2021
.
Второй отчет взаимной оценки противодействия
отмыванию денег и финансированию терроризма
Республики Узбекистан. ЕАГ 2022. Электрон манба:
https://eurasiangroup.org/files/uploads/files/MER_Uz
bekistan_2022_rus.pdf
Concept, legal basis of financial investigation on the
cases of money laundering and stages of formation.
World Bulletin of Management and Law (WBML). Vol.-
25, August -
2023. p. 23. Электрон манба:
https://www.scholarexpress.net/index.php/wbml/artic
le/download/3051/2618.
Ўзбекистон Республикаси Президентининг 2021 йил
28 июндаги “Ўзбекистон Республикасининг жиноий
фаолиятдан
олинган
даромадларни
легаллаштиришга, терроризмни молиялаштиришга
ва
оммавий
қирғин
қуролини
тарқатишни
молиялаштиришга
қарши
курашиш
миллий
тизимини ривожлантириш стратегиясини тасдиқлаш
тўғрисида”ги ПФ
-6252-
сон Фармони., Қонунчилик
маълумотлари миллий базаси, 29.06.2021 й.,
06/21/6252/0617-
сон.
Ўзбекистон Республикаси Ҳуқуқни муҳофаза қилиш
академияси расмий сайти. Электрон манба:
https://proacademy.uz/uz-cyr/news/view?alias=95.
Cherifa Soumati. Prevention of the financing of the
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction in algerian
law and international commitments issued in this
regard. Russian Law Journal. Vol. 11 № 5 (2023) p. 22
95-
2304. Электрон манба:
