PORTUGAL Trends and Developments Contributed by: Ana Reis Mota, Rogério Alves & Associados Sociedade de Advogados SP, RL
Strengthening Fraud Detection and Asset Recovery in Portugal: Law, Policy and Innovation Introduction As cross‑border fraud schemes become more intri - cate and financial transactions move seamlessly across jurisdictions, traditional enforcement tools are increasingly put under strain. Over the past ten years, Portugal has significantly modernised its legislative and judicial responses to fraud and asset recovery, aligning itself with evolving European standards. Rein - forced regulatory scrutiny, enhanced transparency mechanisms for asset management, and a stronger network of international partnerships are gradually reshaping Portugal into a jurisdiction that is better equipped to detect, restrain and recover assets in complex, multi‑jurisdictional cases. The evolving legal definition of fraud in Portugal Portugal’s legal definition of fraud, under Article 217 of the Penal Code, has been traditionally centred around deception for unlawful gain. In response to the grow - ing sophistication of digital fraud, Portuguese authori - ties – while not yet having enacted specific legislation directly addressing AI-driven fraud – have increasingly interpreted existing criminal and civil fraud provisions to include conduct involving synthetic identities, phishing, deepfakes, and manipulation of AI-gener - ated content. These interpretations are reinforced by the broader framework of the Cybercrime Law (Law No 109/2009), as well as Law No 83/2017 (AML Law), both of which have been periodically updated and complemented by sectoral regulations to address emerging threats. In recent years, a significant prosecutorial focus has been on fraud involving digital platforms and virtu - al-asset services, marking a shift from conventional schemes to tech-facilitated economic crimes (such as Operation Samourai, Operation Admiral and Opera - tion Ambrosia). Courts have increasingly recognised these schemes under the existing fraud statute, sup - ported by sophisticated digital forensic evidence. The current Criminal Policy Law, Law No 51/2023, sets out the main objectives, priorities and guide - lines for criminal policy in Portugal for the 2023–2025 biennium. Among the priority areas to be prevented and investigated are bank fraud, misuse of payment
instruments and devices or data, and fraud commit - ted through computerised means or communications, reflecting an explicit policy focus on economic and cyber-enabled crime. In accordance with the Criminal Policy Law, the iden - tification, location and seizure of assets or products related to crimes are also a priority, to be carried out by the Asset Recovery Office (GRA – Gabinete de Recuperação de Ativos ) under the terms of Law No 45/2011 of 24 June, which operates under the Judicial Police. Also, civil fraud claims, based on Articles 483–487 of the Civil Code, remain a parallel path for victims to recover damages. Increasingly, these are supported by real-time digital evidence, including blockchain transactions, server logs, and geolocation metadata. These forms of proof, while still novel, are gaining acceptance as courts adapt to a digital reality in fraud litigation. Trends in asset tracing and enforcement Mechanisms for asset recovery Asset tracing in Portugal is primarily governed by Arti - cle 228 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and, also, Article 391 of the Code of Civil Procedure. These pro - visions establish mechanisms for interim relief, includ - ing preventive seizure ( arresto preventivo ) of movable property or money, whether held in bank accounts or in cash. These measures can be granted ex parte where urgency and risk of asset dissipation are demon - strated. Courts require a strong prima facie case and a detailed list of assets to be traced or frozen, sup - ported by credible evidence. The legislative framework for extended confiscation remains centred on Law No 5/2002, of 11 January, which provides for a special regime of loss of assets in cases of organised and economic financial crime. Under Article 7, where a defendant is convicted for certain catalogue offences and there is a discrepancy between their lawful income and their patrimony, that “incongruent” portion of the assets is presumed to derive from criminal activity, unless the defendant proves their lawful origin.
278 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook