| Abstract [eng] |
Money laundering constitutes one of the most pressing issues of the contemporary world, exerting a detrimental impact not only on the financial systems of individual states but also on the international financial system as a whole. Criminal law serves as one of the instruments employed to combat this phenomenon. However, the fight against money laundering can only be effective if criminal liability for such conduct is properly regulated. This master's thesis aims to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the legal regulation of the legalization of property acquired through criminal means (money laundering) as well as the objective and subjective elements constituting the offence. The research also delves into the problems of interpretation and application of the law encountered in practice and examines the relevant criminal law provisions of several foreign jurisdictions—namely, the United States, Spain, and Latvia—with the purpose of identifying significant differences and assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the Lithuanian legal framework governing money laundering. Based on an analysis of legislation and judicial practice, it is concluded that, despite the formal compliance of Lithuanian criminal law with international standards, practical difficulties persist in the qualification of money laundering offences, particularly in establishing the purpose of concealing or legitimizing assets obtained through criminal means. Attention is drawn to the fact that, under Article 216 of the Lithuanian Criminal Code, the object of money laundering may encompass any type of property, including virtual currency, provided that it has been acquired through criminal activity or participation therein. Consideration is given to whether the requirement of participation in criminal activity should be eliminated as redundant. Furthermore, the author emphasizes that it is impossible to exhaustively enumerate all possible acts constituting the legalization of proceeds of crime; accordingly, the attempt to do so under Article 216 of the Lithuanian Criminal Code is criticized, and the elimination of such a list is proposed. In addition, it is noted that the specific purpose of money laundering constitutes a crucial distinguishing feature that separates it from other offences, such as that provided for under Article 189 of the Criminal Code. Therefore, the author suggests that the legislator should amend the wording of Article 216(1) in such a way as to make it explicitly clear that the existence of such a purpose is a necessary element for all offences established under this provision. |
