IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Accomplishing Human Rights Justice In The Context Of Assets Confiscation: An Evaluation Of The United Kingdom Drug Laws Enforcement

Listed author(s):
  • Kato Gogo Kingston


    (University of East London, School of Law, United Kingdom)

Registered author(s):

    It is estimated that crude oil, tourism and illicit drug trade are among the top five most financially inducing business in the world. Drug cartels conducts sophisticated and well organised activities including money laundering and monitoring of large networks of their couriers. In past the decade, the United Kingdom has incurred large expenditure on the treatment of drug related illnesses and, on the enforcement of drug control laws. Several drug laws are enacted to dealing with the waves of illicit drugs in the country. There is controversy over the ways by which the properties of the drug traffickers and suspected drug dealer, are seized by the State; in order to seize anyone's private property prior to commencement of legal proceedings to effect permanent forfeiture, the law enforcement agencies are only required to show 'probable cause' that the property being seized is acquired with the profit of drug crime alternatively, that the property facilitates drug criminal activities. Using data from academic materials and United Kingdom case laws, the paper argues that the United Kingdom drug trafficking laws particularly the enforcement of 'civil asset recovery' under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 and, the 'Criminal confiscation' under the Drug trafficking Act 1994 violates the International Human Rights Laws.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by ASERS Publishing in its journal Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics.

    Volume (Year): II (2011)
    Issue (Month): 1 (June)
    Pages: 9-17

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:srs:jarle1:2:v:2:y:2011:i:1:p:9-17
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:srs:jarle1:2:v:2:y:2011:i:1:p:9-17. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Madalina Constantinescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.