Abstract
The research paper is based on non-conviction based confiscation system. The system was recently proposed by the European Commission. In general, the paper gives a comparative approach between non-conviction based confiscations and conviction-based confiscation. However, in some nations, non-conviction based confiscation is referred to as Civil Forfeiture. The main aim of conducting this study, therefore, is to have a comparative study of the conviction-based confiscation in Kuwait and non-conviction based confiscation in Australia. The study as well will identify the gaps involved in non-conviction based confiscation that will enhance its adoption or not. The significance of the study, however, lies in the lack of knowledge regarding non-conviction based confiscation which can enhance its understanding to the general public. Therefore, the research intends to offer more literature about the topic of study. Moreover, the research study will enhance and have a broader understanding of non-conviction based confiscation. It the process of conducting the research, however, classic jurisprudential method and empirical data in the form of interviews will be employed. The research also intends to offer better comparative study concerning the two systems of study, non-conviction based confiscation and conviction-based confiscation. The empirical data in the form of interviews will offer the broader perspective of how the general public understand conviction-based confiscation in Kuwait and their understanding of non-conviction based confiscation in Australia. Moreover, the research will as well show the basics of employing the classic jurisprudential method and empirical data which are the major research methods that are used. Nevertheless, the study as well indicates whether the study and adoption of non-conviction based confiscation are needed in Kuwait as it is in Australia. However, both software analysis method and transcribing of the recorded interviews will be the best analysis tools that will be employed in this research to obtain the final comparative result about these two systems. In general, therefore, the research indicates the need to adopt non-conviction based confiscation.
Significance of the Research
The research intends to improve the understanding of non-conviction based confiscation through a comparative study of non-conviction based confiscation in Australia and conviction-based confiscation in Kuwait. Through various research, it is evident that there is less and stagnant improve knowledge and understanding regarding these systems. The non-conviction based confiscation system in Australia is controlled and managed by proceedings of crime Act 2002 (Rui et al. 402). The idea of conducting non-conviction based confiscation research is important to various stakeholders in the criminal sector as well as the victims. Consequently, the research will be used to attain more details as far as the criminal systems are concerned (Rui et al. 405). On the other hand, the exploration will help to attain the clarity of whether to adopt the non-conviction based confiscation as released by the European Commission.The understanding, however, will be important to both nations, Kuwait and Australia as there are more ideas that they are yet to learn. Conversely, the research is concerned with giving a comparative idea between the two types of systems (Lusty et al. 350). For one, the two structures have a difference regarding convicting property and convicting the criminal. However, the public does not understand to what extent and the amount of property that can be convicted to replace the type of crime that the criminal has omitted.
Moreover, as far as non-conviction based confiscation is concerned, the state tends to use the property for their activities, as they consider that the property was obtained through criminal activities (Lusty et al. 352). The significance of the system, therefore, is not to let people in poverty. However, the system aims at eliminating and minimizing the amount of property that they consider dirty regarding money flows in the stated countries and government states (Rui et al. 410). Nevertheless, the main purpose remains to be the need to hamper cross-border money, which in most cases may occur in the process of criminal investigation. Therefore, the properties are first convicted before the criminal is convicted (Rui et al. 414). There is, therefore, a connection between the property as well as the criminal behaviors.
Despite the adoption of non-conviction based confiscation by various nations and states, there is a lack of literature that governs non-conviction based confiscation and conviction-based confiscation. Therefore, the research intends to develop literature which can be used as a supportive document about understanding the importance and the running if the two systems (Rui et al. 420). In Kuwait, therefore, the research will be significant as it will develop a background of whether to adopt the non-conviction based confiscation of not. Kuwait on the side defines and collaborates in the moment of conviction-based confiscation. Kuwait, therefore, does not depend on and believe in the conviction of property but works with the conviction of the criminal (Lusty et al. 357). The process of a criminal conviction in accordance to Kuwait is more important rather than the property. They believe in the process of punishment to remove the wrong done. Tentatively, they believe that the criminal is the person who has done wrong but not the property. However, in the process, the act of having a changed order in the non-conviction based confiscation, is the main intention of the research (Lusty et al. 356). The research gives an in depth idea and the differences as well as the similarities that govern the two types of system conviction measures and methods.
Given the comparative study, therefore, there will be more understanding of the systems in a better way to ensure that all the literature that govern the study is documented. Nevertheless, at the conclusion of the research, the product or the result will be important and significant in the process of giving more knowledge and idea to the public (Rui et al. 408). Thus, the research is significant to the courts, criminals as well as the public how need to understand the difference in the two types of systems to enable them to adopt non-conviction based confiscation or not. Furthermore, the information is important and essential to the governments and mostly the United States government, which intends to adopt the system given the research (Lusty et al. 347). On the other hand, however, there are several measures that when put in practice will offer better and proper analysis of the required measure and intentions.
In conclusion, therefore, the knowledge gap of the research is on giving the comparative literature between the two systems. In the present research concerning this system, there is a lack of comparison between the non-conviction based and conviction-based confiscation. For this reason, therefore, the proposed research on the comparative study will help in filling the identified research gap.
Methodology
The study will employ a qualitative approach. A qualitative methodology attempts to digest information that cannot be quantified. The approach strives to glean non-countable information and give out an output that is understandable to the audience (Henrik et al. 30). The approach is best suited to the research as it aims at getting the extent of the use of non-conviction based conviction. The outcome is to recommend on whether to adopt the system under study.
However, before embarking into carrying out the study, one should consider varying aspects. For one, the purpose or objective of the study should be deliberated. The researcher should also ensure that they have to control the methods of undertaking the research. On the other hand, resource allocation and time should be considered, as they drive the research (Hennik et al. 45). The aspects should be extensively studied before embarking on any study. Proper prior planning may at times save on resources. The outcome is also devoid of bias.
Research Design
The methodology that will be employed to conduct the research will be empirical data form about interviews as well as a classical jurisprudential method which will help in getting the results of the study. A research design refers to the overall plan that a researcher uses to undertake the research. In most cases, the design illustrates the type of the study, research question, data collection, and analysis methods (Excoffier et al. 125). In general, therefore, a research design is a framework that has the mandate of acquiring answers out of the research questions presented. The research design that will be chosen will be determined by the research question, which the research intends to answer. Therefore, a variety of designs and the research could adopt more than one type of research strategy about the research question. In this case, our design has to be compatible with the design question, which intends to find out whether to adopt non-conviction based confiscation or not. Some of these research designs include sampling, Questionnaires, and interviews (Excoffier et al. 130). However, the research will adopt random sampling method, questionnaires, and interviews. People to undertake the surveys will be the civilians or the citizens. However, the dialogues will be based on the top officials in the internal courts that have adopted the system or are yet to adopt.
Sampling refers to the process of selecting a given portion of people or a group of people who will represent the whole population (Hennik et al. 56). A specific sample of people will be selected in Kuwait and Australia to represent the conviction-based confiscation and non-based conviction confiscation respectively. The views and feedback received from the sampled group will represent the whole population in which their views were to be collected. However, in the process of selecting a sample group, some few points need to be put in place. The best sample size needs to be determined that is not too big or too small about the real population (Excoffier et al. 127). Apart from the size, the type of sampling used is significant.
Each specimen technique has its advantages and disadvantages that make it superior to the rest of the types. Nevertheless, in this research, random sampling method will be used with a sample population of 500 in both countries (Hennik et al. 97). People to be involved in answering the questioners will be randomly selected without concentrating in one region; this, however, applies to both the two countries. Nevertheless, the size decided will be distributed equally to ensure that all the portions and sections of the country get a chance to give their views concerning the question under research.
The surveys will be developed, and important and essential questions included. However, the issuing of the same will be age specific (Excoffier et al. 145). To avoid information biases, the questionnaires will be issued to those above 18 years. Regarding interviews, however, regarding interviews, people in the high positions in the criminal sector will give their views on the topic (Hennik et al. 76).
Consequently, consultations are conversations between two groups of people with the focus of getting and collecting research data. However, there a guide to direct the interviewer will be provided. The questions need to be topic specific and directed towards the aim of getting the data needed. Nevertheless, the questions in Kuwait will be a bit different with those in Australia. The reason being, Kuwait supports conviction-based confiscation while Australia on the other side highly supports Non-based conviction confiscation (Hennik et al. 89). Moreover, with the collection of views using these two type of research design, the result, and the answer will be fully determined in the report writing section. The interviews will be systematic, transparent, credible, as well as reproducible regarding need.
Data Collection Method
The Classical jurisprudential method is important as it will address the research problem in an internal law and legal systems as well as regarding law in social institutions such as the communities. Every design research data will be collected differently, as they incorporate different ideas. Interviews and questionnaires will be used to collect data in both Kuwait and Australia (Excoffier et al. 145). As interviews are crucial and delicate, there is a need to collect the data immediately the speaker talks. In this case, the discussion section will involve more than one interviewee. In the process of collecting data from interviews, the data can be collected in two ways. The data will be recorded using gadgets with the capability, which includes mobile phones (Hennik et al. 70). Moreover, in the process of the discussion, there needs to be a note taker. A note taker takes and writes key messages from the interviewer that will add up to the results. Due to time, short notes will be taken and developed later from the tape record recorded. Therefore, data from the interviews will be collected using recording and short note writing running concurrently (Excoffier et al. 149). The main points to be recorded will depend on the key are of study non-conviction based confiscation against conviction-based confiscation.
On the other hand, however, empirical data forms are important as it will collect all the ideas that people have about comparing the non-conviction based confiscation as well as conviction-based confiscation. The data collected in the forms will be the collection method. The respondents will answer all the questions by the instructions granted in the questions (Hennik et al. 77). For better results, the answers should be precise and to the point. In the process of the respondents filling the survey, however, there will be guides who will guide the respondents in filling the questions as well as explain to them questions that they misinterpret the intended meaning (Excoffier et al. 137). Therefore, data collection in any research including this, non-conviction based confiscation should be carried with much care as it determines the fate of the result that will be acquired. All the data for Kuwait will be collected separately from those of Australia. To avoid mixing. Therefore, there will be different section and areas of collected these data. In this case, therefore, a group of people to be interviewed will be selected and the interview questions assembled.
Data Analysis Procedure and Data Interpretation
Just collecting data without analyzing the given data is no sense. Therefore, after data collection, it is essential to analyze and interpret the data after that (Hennik et al. 69). However, different methods of analyzing data exist. In this case, therefore, the research will facilitate the use of transcribing the recorded data, coding the data as well as the use of SPSS software to analyze the questionnaires. After analyzing the data, therefore, it will be evident whether to adapt the non-conviction based confiscation or not. Nevertheless, this will be about the conviction-based confiscation (Excoffier et al. 141). Moreover, there is need to ensure that the analyzed data is interpreted and represented as required. In this case, however, graphs and charts will be used to represent the data to get a clear difference between the two convictions. From the representation, however, it gets easier to have a decision towards the comparative study (Hennik et al. 72). In the process of representing the data, the data analyzed can be compared with the previous research to show a clear difference between the two.
Just like collection measures, the data for Kuwait and Australia will be analyzed separately. The idea will ensure that the analysis results from Kuwait, and Australia does not mix, leading to a misleading information (Excoffier et al. 146). Moreover, since this research is a comparative study, the presentation data criteria should as well show the difference regarding the collected data in Kuwait and Australia. The representation should be graphical: To successfully indicate and illustrate the difference in two criminal systems (Hennik et al. 75). In representing the data in this way, therefore the question of the research about whether we should adopt non-conviction based confiscation will be answered in this manner. For this reason, therefore, it is important and crucial to ensuring that particular data is collected, analyzed, represented, and interpreted (Excoffier et al. 135). With this done the research will have fulfilled its purpose. Proper selection of research design regarding sample size selection, data collection, and data analysis is the key to successful research work.
Work cited
Excoffier, Laurent, Guillaume Laval, and Stefan Schneider. "Arlequin (version 3.0): an integrated software package for population genetics data analysis." Evolutionary Bioinformatics online 1 (2005): 47. Pp. 120-150.
Hennink, Monique, Inge Hutter, and Ajay Bailey. Qualitative research methods. Sage, 2010.pp. 30-100
Lusty, David. "Civil forfeiture of proceeds of crime in Australia." Journal of Money Laundering Control 5.4 (2002): pp. 345-359.
Rui, Jon Petter. "Non-conviction based confiscation in the European Union—an assessment of Art. 5 of the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and the Council on the freezing and confiscation of proceeds of crime in the European Union." ERA Forum. Vol. 13. No. 3. Springer-Verlag, 2012. Pp. 400-415.
