Improving procedural mechanisms for seizing cryptocurrencies in criminal proceedings

The object of the research is electronic digital assets such as Bitcoin, Etherium, Ripple, and others used in illegal activities as objects of crime, as well as means of achieving a criminal result. Taking into account their decentralization, anonymity, immaterial form of existence, high volatility, as well as security by cryptographic encryption tools, the authors aim to resolve the issue of the possibility of arresting crypto assets with available criminal procedural tools. The article is based on criminal and criminal procedure legislation, as well as the judicial practice of the Russian Federation and a number of foreign jurisdictions. When working on the study, the authors used the following methods: a comparative legal methodm which allowed them to consider domestic methods of seizing cryptocurrency in the context of their foreign counterparts; a method of analyzing the legal positions of courts of various parts of the judicial system of the Russian Federation, which allowed them to identify existing problems of legal regulation of the seizure of cryptocurrencies and evaluate the approaches proposed by practice to their solution; and a synthesis method, which made it possible to formulate conditions for increasing the effectiveness of the seizure of digital assets. The authors criticize the doctrine's proposed implementation in the Russian Federation of foreign experience in criminalizing refusal to provide law enforcement agencies with a password from a cryptographic wallet as contrary to the privilege against self-incrimination. As an incentive for the issuance by the law enforcement agency of passwords from crypto wallets, it is proposed to consider it as one of the conditions of a pre-trial cooperation agreement. At the same time, it is proposed to formalize the process of issuing an electronic digital asset within the framework of an "investigative experiment" provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation. The need for maximum concretization of the seized cryptocurrency in court decisions is also emphasized, including the indication of digital identifiers of the cryptocurrency, its name, quantity, as well as the determination of its monetary equivalent, in order to increase the property guarantees of the rights of the victim in criminal proceedings. The authors substantiate the need to intensify international cooperation on the basis of the CIS, SCO, BRICS, in order to create procedural mechanisms to compel centralized cryptocurrency exchanges, which are their residents, to cooperate in blocking and arresting online crypto wallets The authors declare no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References