Economic offence
Money laundering defence lawyer
Art. 301 Criminal Code
Money laundering punishes acquiring, possessing, using, converting or transferring property knowing it derives from criminal activity, with the aim of concealing or disguising its unlawful origin or of helping a person involved in the predicate offence to evade its legal consequences. The predicate offence need not have been tried, or even precisely identified: it is enough to prove the unlawful origin of the assets by circumstantial evidence.
There is also a negligent form of the offence, applicable to those who, given their profession — lawyers, advisers, financial institutions — should have suspected the unlawful origin of the funds and failed to take the precautions required of them. Distinguishing intent from negligence, and both from mere non-culpable ignorance, is the core of the defence in these cases.
For a professional subject to anti-money-laundering obligations, not asking the right questions in time can turn an ordinary client into the origin of your own criminal investigation.
Scope of work
- Defence in investigations for both wilful and negligent money laundering
- Analysis of the predicate offence and circumstantial evidence of the funds' origin
- Defence of professionals subject to anti-money-laundering obligations
- Coordination with asset-tracing investigations of international origin
When to call
- You are under investigation over fund movements whose origin is being questioned
- You are a professional subject to anti-money-laundering regulations and accused of a breach
- You have received a request from SEPBLAC or a financial institution about a transaction
Frequently asked questions
Do I need to have committed the predicate offence to be liable for laundering?
No. Money laundering is a stand-alone offence: it can be committed by someone who was not involved in the offence from which the funds derive, provided they knew — or, in the negligent form, should have suspected — their unlawful origin.
What is circumstantial evidence of unlawful origin?
It is the usual way of proving the criminal origin of funds when there is no prior conviction for the predicate offence: unexplained increases in wealth, the absence of any lawful economic activity to account for them, or the use of opaque structures. Its evidential weight is disputed on a case-by-case basis.
What obligations do professionals have regarding money laundering?
Certain professionals — lawyers, in certain activities, among them — are subject to obligations to identify clients, carry out special scrutiny of transactions and, where applicable, report to SEPBLAC. Failure to comply can have administrative and, in serious cases, criminal consequences.