draining development.pdf - Khazar University

The Kleptocrat’s Portfolio Decisions 425tance in Criminal Matters, decided to transmit to Nigeria all the assets inSwitzerland beneficially owned by the Abacha family, about US$500 million,waiving the need for a prior judicial forfeiture decision in Nigeria.That decision was upheld by the Swiss Supreme Court, which alsoconfirmed that Abacha, his sons, and accomplices formed a criminalorganization within the meaning of the Swiss Penal Code and that anyasset controlled by such member should be forfeited unless it could beshown to have been legally acquired, that is, there was a reversal of theburden of proof relating to these funds. All funds in Switzerland havenow been repatriated.In the event, Switzerland was reluctant to exercise its jurisdiction tohold the main criminal trial of the members of the Abacha criminalorganization, deeming that it was more appropriate that such a trialshould take place in Nigeria. However, the criminal trial of the Abachasons, who were charged in September 2000 before the High Court ofAbuja, has yet to begin because of the innumerable appeals lodged in theNigerian courts by the Abachas’ massive team of attorneys and theirapparent ability to delay or halt any legal process in Nigeria.Mutual legal assistance. Based on the information and documents discoveredthrough the Geneva criminal proceedings, requests for mutuallegal assistance were lodged by Nigeria in Jersey, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg,and the United Kingdom. 13 In the following months, an additionalUS$1.3 billion was frozen in those jurisdictions at the request of Nigeria.The results then obtained in those jurisdictions depended much onwhether their respective authorities initiated their own criminal investigationinto money laundering or not. Thus, in Jersey and Liechtenstein,the local law enforcement authorities, with the active participation ofNigeria, identified and froze more accounts than simply those designatedin the requests for mutual legal assistance.In Luxembourg, no such investigations took place, and only theaccounts in the banks designated in the Nigerian request of February2000 were frozen. The assets in these accounts have been forfeited by theLuxembourg authorities, and recognition of that decision is being soughtin the Luxembourg courts. Nigeria, as victim, should be entitled toreceive the proceeds of the forfeiture. This outcome is, however, onceagain, being contested by the Abacha family.