Subscribe
Legal - August 22, 2025
On 17 July 2025, Dáil Éireann debated the Proceeds of Crime and Related Matters Bill 2025, a legislative proposal introduced by Minister for Justice Jim O’Callaghan to strengthen Ireland’s framework for confiscating assets derived from criminal activities.
The Bill aims to modernise the Proceeds of Crime Act 1996 and enhance the operational capabilities of Ireland’s Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB).
The debate revealed widespread support for targeting the financial foundations of organised crime, alongside concerns about implementation and resource allocation.
The historical context regarding Ireland’s approach to asset seizure was revolutionised following the 1996 murder of prominent journalist Veronica Guerin, which led to the enactment of the Proceeds of Crime Act and the establishment of the CAB.
These measures introduced a civil forfeiture system, enabling the state to seize assets without a criminal conviction by demonstrating their illicit origin. Since its inception, CAB has recovered over €220 million, significantly disrupting organised crime, particularly in drug trafficking.
However, as criminal methods evolve, legislative updates are necessary to maintain effectiveness.
The 2025 Bill attempts to address this by streamlining seizure processes and introducing new tools to target illicit funds.
Key Provisions of Proceeds of Crime and Related Matters Bill 2025 introduces several reforms to bolster CAB’s effectiveness.
These include a shortened seizure timeline. The Bill aims to achieve this by reducing the period for permanently seizing assets from seven years to two years after a court determines they are derived from crime, aiming to prevent criminals from benefitting during protracted legal processes.
Another provision of the Bill relates to automatic receiver appointments. This means that once assets are deemed illicit, a receiver will be appointed to assume immediate control, ensuring the assets cannot be used by their owners pending final disposal.
We also see efforts at enhanced freezing mechanisms that confer new powers to allow CAB to issue a seven-day “payment freezing direction” and seek court-ordered “payment freezing orders” for up to 90 days, renewable as necessary, to secure suspected crime proceeds at the investigation’s outset.
Central to the Bills objectives is the prevention of re-litigation. The Bill prohibits re-arguing issues already adjudicated, reducing delays from repetitive legal challenges while preserving appeal rights.
It also proposes to strengthened investigative tools for non-Garda experts, such as tax and social welfare officers, allowing them to participate in interviews for serious offences, with anonymity protections for CAB officers extended to post-employment to enhance operational security.
A social dimension of Bill can be found in its provisions regarding community reinvestment. This means that seized funds are channelled through Ireland’s Community Safety Fund, which has increased from €2 million in 2022 to €4 million in 2025, and which aim to support local projects to improve safety and well-being.
As with every piece of legislation of this kind, a balance must be found to ensure that it can incorporate judicial oversight so that actions flowing from it are reasonable, necessary, and proportionate, thereby balancing enhanced powers with individual rights. This is not always easy to achieve.
Despite this however, the recent Dáil debate underscored a broad consensus on the Bill’s objectives, with deputies across parties affirming the importance of disrupting organised crime by targeting its financial resources.
Minister O’Callaghan emphasised that the legislation builds on Ireland’s pioneering 1996 framework, which has drawn international interest for its non-conviction-based approach. He highlighted the need to prevent criminals from retaining ill-gotten gains, noting CAB’s role in denying over €220 million to criminals since its establishment. Deputies from Sinn Féin, Labour, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, the Social Democrats, and others expressed support for reducing the seizure timeline and enhancing CAB’s investigative powers, viewing these as critical steps to deter criminal activity.
However, several deputies raised concerns about implementation. Sinn Féin deputies argued that the Community Safety Fund, while a positive initiative, suffers from a cumbersome application process that often fails to direct funds to the most disadvantaged communities, particularly those identified by the Pobal deprivation index.
They advocated for a more targeted allocation to areas hardest hit by crime. Fine Gael’s Barry Ward cautioned that prolonged freezing orders, if not accompanied by transparent litigation processes, could raise fairness issues, emphasising the need for individuals to understand the basis for such orders.
Concerns were also raised about the closure of CCTV systems in some areas, which deputies argued leaves communities vulnerable to crime. The debate also touched on broader societal issues. Several deputies stressed the need for preventive measures, such as youth diversion programmes and addiction services, to address the root causes of criminality, particularly among young people drawn to the visible wealth of local criminals.
Proposals for a “mini-CAB” to target mid-level criminals were floated, aiming to disrupt their lifestyles before they escalate to major organised crime figures. Additionally, there were calls to explore using seized assets, such as properties, for social housing during legal proceedings, though practical challenges were acknowledged.
The Bill also effectively aligns itself with findings of the he European Parliament’s 2024 report, “Confiscation of Assets in the EU.”
This Report provides broader context, estimating that criminal revenues in the EU reach €110 billion annually, or 1% of GDP. In Ireland, criminal markets generate approximately €1.7 billion per year.
The Report highlights for instance that only 2% of criminal proceeds are frozen and 1% confiscated across the EU, emphasising the need for robust legal frameworks like the one Ireland is advancing.
Ireland’s Bill aligns with these by prioritising rapid asset recovery and maintaining judicial oversight. The Report notes challenges in cross-border cooperation and mutual recognition of confiscation orders, areas where Ireland could further enhance its framework, as suggested by calls for broader international protocols during the debate.
The Bill’s provisions for freezing crypto-assets also reflect the EU’s focus on addressing modern criminal tactics, such as money laundering through digital currencies.
The 2025 Bill positions Ireland to maintain its leadership in asset recovery, responding to the evolving sophistication of criminal enterprises. The shortened seizure timeline and new freezing powers address delays that allow criminals to retain wealth, while the Community Safety Fund’s expansion demonstrates a commitment to reinvesting proceeds in affected communities.
However, the concerns raised in the Dáil highlight implementation challenges. Ensuring equitable fund distribution requires simplifying application processes and prioritising disadvantaged areas. The under-resourcing of An Garda Síochána, particularly in rural regions, could limit enforcement capacity, as the EU report emphasises the need for adequate training and resources to maximise asset recovery.
Fairness in freezing orders also remains a critical issue. While the Bill includes judicial safeguards, ensuring transparency and access to litigation for affected individuals will be essential to maintain public trust.
Additionally, the proposal to target mid-level criminals and reinvest in preventive programmes aligns with the EU’s emphasis on disrupting criminal networks early and addressing social vulnerabilities that fuel crime.
We can state with some confidence then that the Proceeds of Crime and Related Matters Bill 2025 strengthens Ireland’s framework for combating organised crime by targeting its financial roots.
By streamlining asset seizures, enhancing investigative powers, and reinvesting funds in communities, the Bill builds on a globally respected model established in 1996.
As the EU pushes for more effective asset confiscation, Ireland’s proactive measures position it as a leader, provided it addresses the practical and systemic challenges highlighted.
The Bill’s success will depend on balancing enforcement efficiency with fairness and ensuring that the benefits of seized assets reach the communities most harmed by crime.