|
Addressing Illicit Enrichment of Public Officials in Light of the Presumption of Innocence
|
Shirin Behrozinezhad *   , Mahdi Hadavand , Alimohammad Falahzadeh |
|
|
|
Abstract: (5 Views) |
In recent decades, through multilateral conventions and domestic laws of certain countries, a new tool has been identified to combat the illicit wealth of public officials. According to this framework, any government official possessing "unexplainable wealth" is presumed to have acquired those assets illicitly and is considered guilty, unless they can prove the legitimacy of that assets themselves. Today, the crime of illicit enrichment has become a powerful tool, especially in the fight against political corruption. This is because placing the burden of proof of innocence on the accused significantly reduces the prosecution's duty to prove the crime, thereby helping to avoid the difficulties related to the detection, prosecution, and proof of corruption. However, the presumption of corruption and the reversal of the burden of proof in this crime also raise significant human rights challenges, as some believe that placing the burden of proving the legitimacy of assets on the accused conflicts with the presumption of innocence. Nonetheless, it appears that the presumption of innocence is not absolute; rather, in specific cases such as acquiring disproportionate and excessive assets that does not align with legal income, it can be set aside based on public interest in the fight against corruption, provided that the principles of rationality and proportionality are considered and the other defensive rights of the accused are upheld.
|
|
| Keywords: Illicit enrichment, Crime of illicit enrichment, Unexplainable wealth, conflict of the presumption of innocence with the presumption of illicit enrichment |
|
|
|
|
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
