Transnational organized crime

Transnational organized crime (TOC) is organized crime coordinated across national borders, involving groups or markets of individuals working in more than one country to plan and execute illegal business ventures.^[1] In order to achieve their goals, these criminal groups use systematic violence and corruption. Common transnational organized crimes include conveying drugs, conveying arms, trafficking for sex, toxic waste disposal, materials theft and poaching.^[2]

This article needs additional citations for verification. (October 2016)

Given TOC's complex qualities, definitions may vary depending on the context. Generally, TOCs are organizations that engage in illicit criminal activities in more than one country with the intent of gaining influence or material benefit.^[3] TOCs come in a variety of forms and constantly change in structure. More often than not, they're a collection of groups part of a fluid international network^[4] or are part of a temporary collective of small organizations.^[5]

Some scholars may emphasize TOC's role as a product of capitalism and an "illicit counterparts of multinational corporations” by pursuing geographical positions from which to operate shipments, secure markets, and collaborate with trusted criminal entities.^{[6] [7]} Other scholars associate TOC operations as a security risk affecting public safety, human rights, economic stability, government accountability, and exacerbating internal conflicts.^[3]

Article III, title: "Scope of application", section II of the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime, defines transnational criminal activity under the following conditions:

“(a) committed in more than one state”; (b) committed in one state but a substantial part of its preparation, planning, direction or control takes place in another state; (c) committed in one state but involves an organized criminal group that engages in criminal activities in more than one state; (d) committed in one state but has substantial effects in another state.”

Prior to World War I, several organizations were created to formalize international police cooperation, but most quickly failed, primarily because public police institutions were not sufficiently detached from the political centers of their respective states to function autonomously as expert bureaucracies.^[8] In 1914, the First International Criminal Police Congress was held in Monaco, which saw police officers, lawyers and magistrates from 24 countries meeting to discuss arrest procedures, identification techniques, centralized international criminal records and extradition proceedings. This organization appeared poised to avoid the political forces that ended earlier organizations, but the outbreak of World War I disorganized the Congress.^[9]

In 1923, a second International Criminal Police Congress was held in Vienna, on the initiative of Johannes Schober, President of the Austrian police. Schober, eager to avoid the politics that doomed previous international police efforts, noted that "ours is not a political but a cultural goal. It only concerns the fight against the common enemy of humankind: the ordinary criminal."^[8] This second Congress created the International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC), which served as the direct forerunner of Interpol.^[10] Founding members included police officials from Russia, Austria, Germany, Belgium, Poland, China, Egypt, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland and Yugoslavia.^[11] In 1926, the ICPC's General Assembly, held in Berlin, proposed that each country establish a central point of contact within its police structure: the forerunner of the National Central Bureau (NCB).^[10] In 1938, the Nazis assumed control of the ICPC and most countries stopped participating, effectively causing the ICPC to cease to exist as an international organization.

After World War II, Belgium led the rebuilding of the organization, with a new headquarters in Paris and a new name - Interpol. The United Nations did not recognize Interpol as an intergovernmental organization until 1971.^[10] On June 17, 1971, President Nixon declared "America's public enemy number one in the United States is drug abuse. In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive." ^[12] With this declaration, the United States began the War on Drugs. At the time, the flow of illicit narcotics into its borders was deemed a major risk to the health and safety of Americans, and as a result, enormous resources were spent in the effort to curtail both the supply of and demand for illegal drugs. In the three decades that followed President Nixon's declaration, drug trafficking served as the dominant form of what the United States and many of its allies viewed as transnational organized crime.^[13]

In recent years, that viewpoint has changed. The character of transnational organized crime has changed in three major ways since the war on drugs began. Drug trafficking has become more diversified, criminal networks have harnessed new methods of conducting business, and the structure of criminal networks has changed. Organized crime has gone global, giving way to the term transnational organized crime. Global governance has failed to keep pace with economic globalization. Antonio Maria Costa, former executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, effectively summarized the change in TOC over the last quarter century by saying, "as unprecedented openness in trade, finance, travel and communication has created economic growth and well-being, it has also given rise to massive opportunities for criminals to make their business prosper."^[2]

Transnational organized crime is widely opposed on the basis of a number of negative effects. It can undermine democracy, disrupt free markets, drain national assets, and inhibit the development of stable societies.^[23] In doing so, it has been argued^{[citation needed]}, national and international criminal groups threaten the security of all nations. The victims of these transnational crime networks are governments that are unstable or not powerful enough to prevent them, with the networks conducting illegal activities that provide them with profits. Transnational organized crimes interrupt peace^{[citation needed]} and stability^{[citation needed]} of nations worldwide, often using bribery, violence, or terror to meet their needs.

TOC is insufficiently understood, according to the executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.^[2] In the most recent full-scale United Nations assessment of TOC, conducted in 2010, the executive director states, "there is a lack of information on transnational criminal markets and trends. The few studies that exist have looked at sections of the problem, by sector or country, rather than the big picture. Without a global perspective there cannot be evidence-based policy."^[2] In response to the threat, law enforcement agencies have created a number of effective approaches for combating this transnational organized crime.^[24]

Louise I. Shelley (Director of the Terrorism, Transnational Crime and Corruption Center at George Mason University) has said:

Transnational crime will be a defining issue of the 21st century for policymakers - as defining as the Cold War was for the 20th century and colonialism was for the 19th. Terrorists and transnational crime groups will proliferate because these crime groups are major beneficiaries of globalization. They take advantage of increased travel, trade, rapid money movements, telecommunications and computer links, and are well positioned for growth.^[25]

TOCs may be involved in various types illicit activities. Smaller organizations within a TOC network may operate these activities at a local/regional level while a larger organization arrange international logistics with the help of middlemen who facilities coordination between both groups.^[26] The most common types of crime include the following:^{[27] [28] [29]}

• International Drug trafficking

• Human trafficking

• Smuggling of migrants

• Firearms trafficking

• Illicit Exploitation of natural resources (including illegal mining, crude oil theft, and illegal logging.)

• The illegal wildlife trade (including poaching and smuggling.)

• The sale of fraudulent medical products.

• Organ Trafficking

• Cybercrime

• Money laundering (among other illicit financial activities.)

TOC is commonly linked to terrorist organizations, serving as patrons and as a reliable alternative to state sponsorship. Frequent transactions with terrorist groups engaging in asymmetric attacks include the sale of high-yield weapons that can inflict substantial damage to populations, as well as small firearms and common explosives.^[30]

In recent decades, organized crime and terrorist organizations have participated in overlapping illicit activities, leading to difficulty in categorizing them. Traditionally, motive distinguishes their categorization as terrorist organization's goals are ideological while a TOC entity's objective is to seek profits, and adopting the other's criminal activities is only a means to an end. Recent scholarship suggests that the intersection between both types of organizations is due to overlapping criminal networks creating hybrid forms of violent actors. ^[31] Some scholars believe that this overlap proves convergence exists between both groups (e.g., terrorist groups will shift their agendas to profit-seeking resembling a criminal organization). In contrast, other scholars downplay convergence frequency among both groups due to differences in goals and motivations.^[32]

Hence, TOC entities may engage in acts of terrorism against governments and rival organizations depending on their political environment, motive, structure, and criminal enterprise. Traditional enterprises (e.g., Yakuza and Russian Mafia) are only likely to get involved in political conflict to secure markets and increase profits since they desire minimal attention from the state. By comparison, narco-terrorist organizations (e.g., Mexican drug cartels) perform public warnings against perceived enemies through paramilitary violence that resembles an insurgent group targeting government security forces and citizens alike.^[30] Various criminal organizations engage in activities that overlap with terrorism, including the Tamil Tigers, FARC, Shinning Path, and the Abu Sayyaf Group.

Most illicit trafficking begins or ends in the world's greatest economic powers, such as the G8 (forum). In other words, the world's largest trading partners are also the world's greatest markets for illicit goods and services. Many of these world powers have recently taken steps to combat TOC in a large, collective, international effort with partners and allies. Several organizations around the world have initiated efforts to combat TOC whose success or failure have yet to be determined.^[33]

According to the UN Asia and Far East Institute (UNAFEI), combating transnational organized crime relies first and foremost on effective investigative techniques and prosecutorial tools. Three techniques in particular stand out as the most important in combating transnational organized crime: electronic surveillance, undercover operations, and the use of confidential informants (CIs),^[34] with electronic surveillance being the single most important and effective law enforcement tool against TOC.^[34] Electronic surveillance provides reliable, often irrefutable evidence of crimes through a participant's own words or image. This form allows law enforcement to learn of conspirators' plans before they are carried out and is particularly helpful in combating TOC because it enables law enforcement in any country to obtain evidence of co-conspirators in other countries. Obtaining evidence of conspiratorial planning internationally would otherwise be very difficult.^{[citation needed]}

After electronic surveillance, the second most important tool is undercover operations,^[34] Through undercover operations, law enforcement agents can infiltrate the highest levels of organized crime by posing as criminals themselves when real criminals discuss their plans and seek assistance in committing crimes. Over time, agents can gain the confidence of criminals and induce them to reveal information on past or ongoing criminal activities.^{[citation needed]} followed by CIs refers to individuals who are not willing to testify but who provide information or assistance to law enforcement in exchange for money or lenient treatment for their own crimes and with the promise of confidentiality.^[34] In many cases,^[which?] CIs are engaged in criminal activity themselves and can therefore provide valuable direct evidence regarding the criminal activities being conducted by their criminal associates. Such evidence frequently enables law enforcement officers to obtain warrants authorizing electronic surveillance. In rare cases, the court may order the disclosure of a CIs identity to a defendant, such as when the informant can provide evidence that may exculpate the defendant.^{[citation needed]}