Internationally-endorsed Guidelines for Asset Recovery

We will also continue to partner closely with other governments, international organisations and civil society to ensure that recovered proceeds of crime are returned in a manner that furthers the goals of transparency and oversight at all stages in the asset recovery process. The United States will promote the development of internationally endorsed guidelines for the transparent and accountable return and management of stolen assets.

Completion Status:
⚠ Unqualified*

*commitment is not specific or/and not measurable

Commitment filtering:

Specific: ❌ no

Even though the first part of the commitment refers to a specific policy area (the recovery of assets), it is a general statement of intent to use various stakeholder partnerships “to ensure that recovered proceeds of crime are returned”, and is therefore not specific.

The second part of the commitment cannot be considered specific either, because it is unclear in which fora these guidelines should be developed. In December 2017, the Global Forum on Asset Recovery (GFAR) – supported by the United States and the UK as co-hosts, the StAR Initiative (World Bank and UNODC) and the four focus countries of Nigeria, Sri Lanka, Tunisia and Ukraine –  developed and adopted the GFAR Principles – 10 principles for disposition and transfer of confiscated stolen assets.[1] Principle 4, in particular, refers to transparency and accountability, stating: “Transferring and receiving countries will guarantee transparency and accountability in the return and disposition of recovered assets. Information on the transfer and administration of returned assets should be made public and be available to the people in both the transferring and receiving country. The use of unspecified or contingent fee arrangements should be discouraged.”[2]

[1] Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative, The GFAR Principles,

[2] Global Forum on Asset Recovery (2017), GFAR Principles for Disposition and Transfer of Confiscated Stolen Assets in Corruption Cases,

Measurable: ❌ no
The first part of the commitment cannot be measured because it is unclear what “to partner” means in terms of concrete actions.

The second part can technically be measured, although it is unclear which fora or partnership will be used to develop these internationally endorsed guidelines, and what they should look like – for example, should they be binding or non-binding?

Last updated: 31 December 2022
Share: twitter email twitter twitter print