The Prosecutor General's Office of the Russian Federation

Dear ladies and gentlemen! Dear colleagues!
As the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation in charge of international cooperation, I would like to expand on the issues of cooperation between states in combating transnational organized crime.

It is known that in the context of internationalization of criminal activities the success of the national justice increasingly depends on the effectiveness of the international anti-crime cooperation, especially in the matters of extradition, legal assistance in criminal cases and confiscation of property obtained by crime.

Many of you know that the Russian Prosecutor General's Office is the only competent authority for the international cooperation in the field of extradition and one of its central authorities for legal assistance in criminal matters.

Currently, Russia cooperates in criminal proceedings with more than 80 countries of the world and with most of them it has special agreements. But our law allows us to interact with foreign partners on the basis of reciprocity. And we use it.

Last year, the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation considered about 10 thousand requests for extradition and legal assistance that were received from abroad or aimed at directing to foreign partners.
In general, cooperation of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia with foreign colleagues is constructive. For example, we effectively use the concept of criminal proceeding transfer on criminal matters. Over the past 5 years, we have received from abroad more than 800 orders for criminal prosecution of Russian citizens, who committed crimes in foreign countries. Perpetrators were punished when the evidence was found.

International legal cooperation became very successful but there are complications that require urgent and comprehensive solutions. These difficulties are caused by different reasons, objective and subjective, in particular, by differences in national legislation and in the approach to interpretation and application of international agreements, by gaps and weaknesses in the legal regulation at the national and international level.

Such meetings as ours provide an opportunity to discuss the problem of interaction with foreign partners openly and to find together solutions of emerging issues on trust.

Currently, one of the most significant problems is time needed to other countries to consider the requests for cooperation made by Russia. At the same time, I note that the Russian Prosecutor General's Office executes, as a rule, foreign requests for a relatively short time. It executes legal aid requests during 2-3 months and extradition requests during no more than 6 months. It should be noted that our Prosecutor’s Office receives unjustified refusals of extradition or legal assistance owing, among other reasons, to the politicization of cooperation matters concerning specific individuals and companies.

Recently we have faced situations when a person, wanted for extradition for criminal justice, applies to a foreign country with a request for asylum in the hope of avoiding the extradition or delaying the process of the decision making to the expiration in the requested or the requesting state. Obviously, it is desirable to establish bilateral dialogue in such cases. And such a practice has already developed with many states.

It is also necessary to coordinate the procedures for issuing and reviewing applications for asylum and adjust their legal regulation at the national and international levels.

There are difficulties in collaboration with the majority of so-called offshore zones. Our position is clear: there should be no refuge from justice for criminals and criminally acquired capital on the planet.

There are other issues that hopefully will be discussed by other members of the Conference during the frank discussions.

Let me make some brief and concrete offers to address the above and many other problems. Seemingly, the work to improve the effectiveness of international cooperation in the fight against transnational organized crime should be carried out in the following areas:
1) Strengthening the international legal or contractual framework for cooperation;
2) Development of national legislation providing for the international legal cooperation;
3) Improving legal cooperation.
I. As for the development of the international legal framework for cooperation, it would be good if the states and relevant international organizations reviewed the existing agreements on cooperation in criminal matters in order to upgrade them, where necessary. As an example of the adaptation of contracts to new realities, I would like to note the modernization of the European Convention on Extradition and Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, that was concluded a few decades ago (in 1957 and 1959), being implemented from 2006 on the initiative of Russia. As a result of our active participation and work, two additional protocols to the European Convention on Extradition were adopted. In particular, they limit the application of the statute of limitations and immunities to extradited persons and simplify relationships. By the way, one of the originators of this initiative was the current Russian Prosecutor General Yuri Chaika, who was the Minister of Justice at that time.

II. Experts estimate that tens of billions of dollars stolen in Russia are laundered abroad. This problem is faced by other countries. In this case, the countries receiving dirty money do not only damage their reputation, but also become a platform on which criminal business develops like a cancer fueled by laundered crime capital.

This involves the mutual interest of countries in the fight against cross-border flow of dirty investments. And we believe that opportunistic mercantile interests should not prevail over the general strategic task of the common fight against the laundering of proceeds of crime. In this respect, I would like to mention Switzerland, which has considerably strengthened its legislation in recent years and has a strict policy against the assets of criminal origin.

I am sure that the conclusion of bilateral and multilateral international treaties for the return of property obtained by crime and confiscated as a result of international cooperation will contribute to the return of huge proceeds of crime went abroad. Without such agreements, it will be unprofitable for any state to send requests abroad for confiscation of property obtained by crime, since the confiscated assets may remain at the disposal of the requested state.

III. As is known, the proposal on the conclusion of the UN universal treaties on extradition and legal assistance in criminal matters, including matters of confiscation and return of proceeds from crime, has repeatedly sounded in various international forums. We cannot afford spending decades and considerable human and financial resources on the negotiation process for the conclusion of many thousands of bilateral agreements, so that, finally, all the nations of the world have a solid contractual basis for cooperation with each other in criminal cases.

IV. With the development of modern telecommunications, the need for special regulation of international legal assistance in the investigation of cybercrime has emerged. I am sure that the international community cannot accomplish it without the conclusion of the UN treaty on combating crime in the sphere of information technologies. Unfortunately, the Convention on Cybercrime concluded in 2001 under the auspices of the Council of Europe, due to a number of its shortcomings (including issues of cooperation in criminal matters), cannot claim to be a world-recognized agreement in this area.

V. It is important to bring the national legislation, governing international legal cooperation, not only in line with the current but also with future needs. It is necessary to take into account new trends and challenges in crime and best practices of certain states. This work, in our opinion, should be primarily aimed at ensuring the effective implementation of the obligations and rights arising from the concluded international agreements.

VI. As for improving the practice of legal cooperation, the development of interdepartmental cooperation with foreign partners is greatly contributing to the strong mutual trust and working relationship with the competent authorities of foreign countries. Currently, the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation has 69 interdepartmental agreements and other cooperative arrangements with partners from 59 countries, including relating to offshore zones. In recent years, we include in such agreements the provisions for consultation on the stages of preparation and execution of requests for extradition and legal assistance.

We are able to solve many problems within the working groups on cooperation and other special projects in the field of criminal justice, which were created, inter alia, at the initiative of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia with partners from Switzerland, Spain, France, Czech Republic, Cyprus and Israel. These groups identify circumstances that prevent the effective execution of the request for extradition and legal assistance and develop measures to eliminate them.

In addition, meetings with representatives of the competent authorities of foreign countries are organized for the resolution of cooperation issues. In this regard, I note the successful cooperation with colleagues from Belarus, Kazakhstan, Armenia, including cross-border cooperation.

In recent years, the staff of the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia has been increasingly seconded by us to foreign countries for information support of Russian requests and direct participation in court hearings.

And the last one. VII. I am sure that the Guidance on Confiscation and Asset Recovery and the updated Guidance on Best Practices in the Field of Mutual Legal Assistance, currently being developed by the International Association of Prosecutors, will be a useful practical support for prosecutors. This decision was adopted at the 18th Annual Conference of the IAP held in Moscow in September 2013.

Dear colleagues, I would be grateful for your active participation in the discussion of proposals and problematic issues raised here.

Thank you for your attention!