พระราชบัญญัติป้องกันและปราบปรามการฟอกเงิน พ.ศ. 2542 : ศึกษากรณีการใช้มาตรการพิเศษในการแสวงหาพยานหลักฐาน / นนชปวร สุวรรณกุล = Money laundering control act B.E.2542 : case study of special methods of obtaning evidence / Nonchaphavon Suwannakul
At the present time, the offense of money laundering has been developed into a transnational organized crime relying on expertise and technology to induce the commission. Additionally, the offense also features of many special characteristics, which render problems and obstacles in finding and collecting evidence. Though the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 1999 provides special measures for gathering the evidence by whether authorizing financial institutes, agencies or persons to supply information, allowing the search without warrant, accessing to telephone or computer data, requiring the report on transaction etc., but the measures are not satisfactory for enforcing the Act as to gather the evidence that is sufficient for prosecution and conviction of the offender. Furthermore, the Court's criteria on admission of evidence, that is in electronic means and evidence and hearsay, are not concordant with dynamic evolution of the crime, therefore, causing “uncertainty in punishment’.A study should be made on special legal measures, such as what are being used in foreign countries and those are provided by international conventions, for being applied to the offense of money laundering and the measures, which should be applied to finding and collecting evidence are inquiry my a panel, infiltration of agents, covert intelligence operation, requesting expert for assisting the officer, requesting the officer who enforces law of computer offenses for supplying information, possession in custody, cross-border pursuit, measures of promoting cooperation in property matters which affect on gathering evidence, reverse sting operation, criminalizing the offense of precluding judicial procedures and plea bargaining. The mentioned measures are significantly essential and applicable to particularly different processes although they are constituted with each own limits. Thus, exploiting only one measure could not prevent and suppress the crime of money laundering efficiently nor achieve the expected goal. However, introducing such measure appropriately could neutralize the obstacles of gathering evidence in money laundering prosecution, convict the offender and effectively dispose the property that is acquired in course of the offense.
