Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made (28.05.08) to approve the Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-

Decision Reference: MD-TR-2008-0065
Decision Summary Title:	Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-		Date of Decision Summary:	20th May 2008
Decision Summary Author:	Ian Coupland - T&R Business Manager		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	N/A
Written Report Title:	Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-		Date of Written Report:	19th May 2008
Written Report Author:	Caroline Dutot - Assistant Legal Adviser		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Repeal and replacement of the Proceeds of Crime (Designated Countries and Territories) (Jersey) Regulations 1999 with the Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-
Decision(s): The Minister approved the replacement of the existing Regulations with the Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-.
Reason(s) for Decision: The amendments passed to the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law, 1999 by the States of Jersey last year, and now in force, mean that external confiscation orders from any jurisdiction are now capable of registration by the Royal Court and that the enforcement in Jersey of external confiscation orders under the POCL is no longer conditional on countries or territories being designated in the Regulations made under the POCL. However, the designated countries and territories remain listed in the current Regulations made under the POCL. Instead of amending the existing Regulations, it has been decided, in the interests of clarity, that the current Regulations should be repealed and replaced.
Resource Implications: There are no further financial or manpower implications.
Action required: Final draft of law and report to be sent to the Publications Editor of the Greffe by 3rd June 2008 and request that it be lodged at the earliest opportunity with a request for debate on 15th July 2008.
Signature:		Position: Senator F H Walker, Chief Minister
Date Signed: 28th May 2008		Date of Decision: 28th May 2008

Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-

19th May, 2008

REPORT

Proceeds of Crime (Enforcement of Confiscation Orders) (Jersey) Regulations 200-

In October and November of this year the Island’s framework to counter money laundering and terrorist financing is to be the subject of a review by the International Monetary Fund. Jersey will be assessed against the international standards set by the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (“FATF”). In order to implement a number of criteria set out in the 40 Recommendations and 9 Special Recommendations of the FATF, against which Jersey will be assessed, a number of amendments were proposed and passed by the States of Jersey last year in respect of the Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law, 1999, (“POCL”) the Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law, 1988 (“DTOL”), the Terrorism (Jersey) Law, 2002 (“TL”) and the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) (Jersey) Law, 2001 (“CJICL”). These amendments are now in force.

One of the amendments passed in respect of each of the laws referred to above sought to implement Recommendation 38, which requires countries to have appropriate laws and procedures in place to provide an effective and timely response to mutual legal assistance. Mutual legal assistance is the formal way in which countries request and provide assistance in obtaining evidence located in one country to assist in criminal investigations or proceedings in another country.

Prior to the amendment of the POCL, DTOL, TL and CJICL the provision of assistance to another jurisdiction to enable the enforcement of an external confiscation order under the POCL and DTOL, or an external restraint or forfeiture order under the TL, or the enforcement of an overseas forfeiture order under the CJICL was dependant on that jurisdiction being listed as a designated country or territory to whom assistance could be given. There was concern that Jersey would be criticised for not providing “effective” mutual legal assistance because the list of designated countries had not been kept up to date in recent years. Instead of updating the list of countries and territories (contained in Regulations issued under the various Laws), the better solution was considered to be that the list of countries and territories should be abandoned and that assistance should be offered on a case by case basis. This was the approach adopted in the amendments to the various Laws, which are now in force.

4. An “external confiscation order” was defined by Article 1 of the POCL, prior to amendment, as meaning an order made by a court in a designated country or territory –

(a) for the purpose of recovering property obtained as a result of or in connection with conduct corresponding to an offence specified in Schedule 1;

(b) for the purpose of recovering the value of the property so obtained; or

5. Article 39 POCL previously provided that on the application of the Attorney General, the Court may register an external confiscation order made in a designated country or territory if –

(a) the Court was satisfied that at the time of registration the order was in force and was not subject to appeal;

(b) it was satisfied, where the person against whom the order is made did not appear in the proceedings, that the person received notice of the proceedings in sufficient time to enable the person to defend them; and

6. The definition of external confiscation order in Article 1 of the POCL has now been amended so that it means an order made by a court in a country or territory outside Jersey –

a) for the purpose of recovering property obtained as a result of or in connection with conduct corresponding to an offence specified in Schedule 1;

(b) for the purpose of recovering the value of the property so obtained; or

7. Article 39 has also been amended to remove the reference to a designated country or territory.

As explained, the amendments mean that external confiscation orders from any jurisdiction are now capable of being registered by the Royal Court and that the enforcement in Jersey of external confiscation orders under the POCL is no longer conditional on countries or territories being designated. However, the designated countries and territories remain listed in the Regulations made under the POCL. Instead of amending the existing Regulations, it has been decided, in the interests of clarity, that the current Regulations should be repealed and replaced.

These draft Regulations would replace the current Proceeds of Crime (Designated Countries and Territories) (Jersey) Regulations 1999 with provisions which are substantially the same as those contained in the current Regulations except that (i) the references to designated countries and territories are removed; and (ii) references to any provisions which have been repealed or amended as a result of the changes to the primary legislation have been altered.

Financial/Manpower Implications -

These Regulations have no financial or manpower resource implications for the States.