
The legal development of measures to seize the assets of criminal activity has been underway since the second half of the 20th century. The variety of measures that have developed - punishment (criminal liability) combined with confiscation, extended confiscation, civil confiscation, non-conviction-based confiscation, declaration of assets ownerless resulting in their forfeiture, and so on, has also shaped two policy strands, one classical and the other hybrid. The latter requires creative solutions to legal measures to deal with the proceeds from crime. However, with the development of various tools and methods to seize illicit assets, it is worth looking back and raising the legal question of proportionality.
Būtent tam skirta neseniai pasirodžiusi Lietuvos socialinių mokslų centro Teisės instituto mokslininko dr. Skirmanto Bikelio publikacija. Žurnale „Laws“ išspausdintame jo straipsnyje „Confiscation Beyond the All-Crime Approach and the Proportionality Principle - A Case of the Lithuanian Illicit Enrichment Offence Concept“ mokslininkas nagrinėja vienos iš lietuviškų priemonių proporcingumą. „Ar baudžiamoji atsakomybė už neteisėto praturtėjimo nusikaltimą (LR BK 1891) ir ją lydintis konfiskavimas tam tikrame kontekste nėra perteklinė valstybės reakcija, pažeidžianti proporcingumo principą?“ – kelia klausimą straipsnio autorius.
In search of answers to this question, S. Bikelis examines the case law of national criminal courts and specific cases, the Constitutional Court’s ruling on the issue, and the conclusions of international judicial institutions.
The full analysis can be found in an open access publication: Bikelis, S. (2025). Confiscation Beyond the All-Crime Approach and the Proportionality Principle—A Case of the Lithuanian Illicit Enrichment Offence Concept. Laws, 14(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/laws14010001.
The project Money Laundering in the system of the Criminal Gains Control Strategies (LEKOSTRA) is funded by the Research Council of Lithuania (LMTLT), Contract No. S-MIP-23-40.


