CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Beare ME, Martens FT. J. Contemp. Crim. Justice 1998; 14(4): 398-427. |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 1998, SAGE Publishing) |
|
DOI |
unavailable |
PMID |
unavailable |
|
Abstract |
This article identifies three structural, procedural and policy decisions that relate to organized crime law enforcement: The structure of the investigative agencies dedicated to containing organized crime, the relationship between the police and the prosecutorial authority, and the use of forfeiture laws and decisions as to who should benefit from these illicit proceeds. Within a framework of globalization, we recognize the need for a degree of uniformity in law enforcement across jurisdictions in order to attempt to target transnational criminals. Pressures are put on countries to meet new international standards and to put into force legislation that is compatible with the laws and procedures in place in other jurisdictions. In an explorative manner, we compare and contrast the U.S.-style of investigating organized crime to that of Canada and examine the possible " Americanization" of Canadian policing. The objective of this article is not to recommend what ought to be the response in terms of organized crime enforcement, but rather bearing in mind traditions, to identify some of the key fundamental differences between our two approaches and to acknowledge the weaknesses and strengths inherent in the various strategies. (Abstract Adapted from Source: Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 1998. Copyright © 1998 by SAGE Publications) |