Issues raised by the offense of money laundering in the ways of the acquiring, possession or use of goods, knowing that they originate from the commission of an offense
Issues raised by the offense of money laundering in the ways of the acquiring, possession or use of goods, knowing that they originate from the commission of an offense

Summary/Abstract: This Article analyzes the offense of money laundering in the normative modalities provided by Article 29 (1) c) of Law no. 656/2002 for the prevention and sanctioning of money laundering, as well as for the establishment of measures to prevent and combat terrorism financing. The analysis of this offense mainly concerns Decision no. 16/2016 issued by the High Court of Cassation and Justice, the formations of the Court for the dissolution of certain legal issues and Decision no. 418/2018 pronounced by the Constitutional Court of Romania and implications of these decisions on the provisions of Article 29 (1) c) of Law no. 656/2002. Moreover, the relation between this offense and the offense of concealment, as provided by Article 270 of the Criminal Code, is analysed.The conclusion we reached at the end of the Article is that the provisions of Article 29 (1) c) of Law no. 656/2002 are unconstitutional not only in the case in which the active subject of the offense of money laundering in the alternative methods expressed by this normative text is also the active subject of the offense from which the goods originate, but also in the case in which the active subject of the money laundering offense is different from the active subject of the offense from which the goods originate, in particular because of the similarities between this offense and the offense of concealment. For these reasons, I believe that this normative text must be repealed.

• Details
• Contents