A/HRC/36/52 would have won the money back by default in 2002 when the statute of limitations expired, had Switzerland not invoked constitutional powers which allow it to freeze assets in order to safeguard national interests. A 2011 Swiss law which reverses the burden of proof and a court decision have paved the way for the return of the money to the country of origin. The Foreign Illicit Assets Act 2015, which allows for the repatriation of funds held in Switzerland by foreign dictators has also been helpful in this regard. 30 However, several provisions of the law are open to entirely subjective interpretation that may be construed as derogating from the rights and interests of the countries of origin.31 Equally problematic are article 15 of the law, which sets out criteria for “a presumption that assets are of illicit origin”, 32 and article 17, which prescribes conditions for the repatriation of funds. 33 Accordingly, such pro-repatriation laws merit the introduction of appropriate and objectively determined safeguards that will protect the interests and rights of the countries of origin. 20. Adequate training and funding of law enforcement officers. The forensic audit skills required to trace monies held by multiple shell companies and parked in special purpose vehicles across multiple jurisdictions are not easily available, particularly in developing countries. While some developed countries are trying to build domestic capacity, effective asset recovery requires sufficient investment, both financially and in terms of staff (training for law enforcement officers, dedicated staff with sufficient expertise and funding to carry out investigations).34 21. Greater transparency and exchange of information. To combat illicit financial flows, law enforcement authorities must be able to access and exchange relevant information about activities, assets or incomes of individuals, companies and legal entities and arrangements in foreign jurisdictions. In the specific area of anti-money-laundering and counter-terrorism financing efforts, the Egmont Group, comprising 152 financial intelligence units, is an example of a global platform whereby expertise and financial intelligence are shared with a view to combating both crimes.35 22. Robust, issue-specific and cross-jurisdictional institutional and professional networks. Restricting the ambit of their anti-illicit financial flow operations to specific issues allows such networks to focus on the details, leverage their specializations and learn from each other’s successes and failures and reduces the potential for politically motivated conflict in large groups. One such example is found in the Russian Federation, where the Office of the Prosecutor General, located in the Office of the Federal Prosecutor, promotes practicable international cooperation through formal and informal patterns of interaction between various national contact centres. This cooperation extends to the identification, arrest, confiscation and restitution of assets accumulated as a result of corruption. 30 31 32 33 34 35 8 The first beneficiary of the December 2015 law was Nigeria, which stands to receive $321 million of the monies stolen by Sani Abacha. See www.reuters.com/article/us-swiss-assets-idUSKCN0YG29Z and www.dailynigerianews.com/2016/07/29/nigeria-switzerland-sign-mou-on-repatriation-of-321mabacha-loot/. The section regarding when an asset freeze is admissible reads as follows: “[where] the government or certain members of the government of the country of origin have lost power, or a change in power appears inexorable; the level of corruption in the country of origin is notoriously high; it appears likely that the assets were acquired through acts of corruption or misappropriation or other crimes; the safeguarding of Switzerland’s interests requires the freezing of the assets” (art. 3 (2)). Available at www.newsd.admin.ch/newsd/message/attachments/44109.pdf, p. 2. The presumption will follow if “the wealth of the individual who has the power of disposal over the assets or who is the beneficial owner thereof increased inordinately, facilitated by the exercise of a public function by a foreign politically exposed person; [and] the level of corruption in the country of origin or surrounding the foreign politically exposed person in question was notoriously high during his or her term of office”. “The restitution of assets is made in pursuit of the following objectives: (a) to improve the living conditions of the inhabitants of the country of origin, or (b) to strengthen the rule of law in the country of origin and thus to contribute to the fight against impunity.” OECD, Better Policies for Development 2014: Policy Coherence and Illicit Financial Flows. Available at www.oecd.org/pcd/Better-Policies-for-Development-2014.pdf. See www.egmontgroup.org/en/content/about.