Analysis highlights gaps in asset recovery and legislative alignment, suggesting reforms for effective investigations.
Despite progress in aligning national legislation with international standards, Serbia continues to face significant obstacles in building a strong and consistent track record in asset recovery. The author examines the effects of Serbia’s previous Financial Investigation Strategy, assessing its impact on the country’s capacity to detect, trace, and seize criminal assets. The article offers analysis key achievements and persistent gaps in implementation, with particular focus on inter-agency coordination, legislative consistency, and operational practice. In light of Serbia’s EU accession process, the article explores the obligations stemming from Chapter 23 (Judiciary and Fundamental Rights) and Chapter 24 (Justice, Freedom and Security), highlighting the need for full alignment with the recently adopted EU Directive 2024/1260 on asset tracing, freezing, confiscation, and management. Special attention is given to the Directive’s emphasis on the alignment of legislative framework, strengthening of policy planning and improvement of track record. Though desk research, the author identifies critical bottlenecks in the current practice of financial investigations and analyses the underlining causes of low rates of provisional and permanent confiscation of criminal assets. Drawing on EU standards, FATF recommendations, and EU comparator jurisdictions, the paper proposes a set of recommendations aimed at improving legislative alignment, institutional coordination, and proactive financial investigations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marina Matić Bošković (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: