Lessons Learnt in Recovering Assets from Egypt, Libya and Tunisia

Filed under - Asset recovery

Published on 30 July 2014 as a TI Helpdesk answer
What are some of the lessons learnt in recovering assets from Egypt, Libya and Tunisia? Particularly, what are the barriers that have prevented the recovery of assets from both the asset sending states and the asset receiving states? For example, is it mostly due to a lack of political will, procedural error, or lack of expertise?


This Helpdesk answer is also available in French.


1.    Challenges and lessons learnt in recovering assets from Egypt, Libya and Tunisia
2.    Identifying and tracing assets after the Arab Spring
3.    Challenges and lessons learnt in asset freezing
4.    The challenges of confiscating and repatriating stolen assets 
5.    References


More than three years after the Arab Spring, the success of Egypt, Libya and Tunisia in recovering assets has been limited. The process of recovering the proceeds of corruption offers many challenges. Assets are often hidden through the use of shell companies and in countries with strong bank secrecy provisions. In addition, the difference in legal systems, ambiguity in legislation, complexity and costs involved, weak investigative capacity, as well as a lack of political will can pose even greater challenges for the effective recovery of assets.

In particular, an analysis of asset recovery efforts in the region shows that the identification, freeze, confiscation and repatriation of stolen assets is hindered by the indiscriminate use of mutual legal assistance requests and the insufficient use of informal channels for requesting assistance.

Countries in the region have complained of demanding evidentiary standards and the lack of clarity regarding mutual legal assistance requirements. A better use of informal channels, such as communication among financial integrity units and available international mechanisms like the Interpol/StAR focal points, could facilitate the collection of intelligence and evidence that in turn would help to build more substantiate formal requests for assistance. At the same time, requested countries need to be more pro-active in supporting the tracing and repatriation of assets, for instance, by sharing information on company registries and properties and allowing non-criminal based forfeitures.

Author(s): Maíra Martini, Transparency International, mmartini@transparency.org
Reviewed by: Marie Chêne, Transparency International; Finn Heinrich, PhD, Transparency International
Publication date: 30 July 2014
Number: 47

Download full answer

Country / Territory - Egypt   |   Libya   |   Tunisia   
Language(s) - English   
Topic - Asset recovery   
Tags - MENA   |   Illicit Financial Flows   |   Asset recovery   |   Mutual Legal Assistance   

Contact the Anti-Corruption Helpdesk

If you work for one of our supporting partner organisations, submit your query to the Helpdesk:

More Helpdesk answers


Trends in anti-bribery laws

Which countries have passed anti-bribery legislation recently, what are their key features, and what global trends do we detect in such legislation?

See the answer



Can you share a good example of a national anti-corruption strategy? Is there any experience in the world, particularly from developing countries or ...

See the answer