PORTUGAL Trends and Developments Contributed by: Ana Reis Mota, Rogério Alves & Associados Sociedade de Advogados SP, RL
Regulatory trends: AML, ESG and whistle-blowing Tensions between strengthening AML and the defend- ant’s fundamental rights Portugal’s anti-money laundering regime, governed by Law No 83/2017 (as altered and republished by Law No 58/2020), has significantly broadened its scope. The statute is now complemented by detailed sectoral regulations issued by the Bank of Portugal, the CMVM (the Portuguese Securities Market Commission), the ASF (the Insurance and Pension Funds Supervisory Authority) and the ASAE (the Economic and Food Safety Authority), including dedicated rules for enti - ties operating with virtual assets and for non-financial obliged entities. The legislation and its implementing regulations now impose enhanced obligations on: • cryptocurrency exchanges and digital-wallet pro - viders; • non-financial professionals, including estate agents, art dealers and other high-risk sectors; and • foreign-owned entities holding assets located in Portugal. The Central Department for Investigation and Penal Action (DCIAP), which holds nationwide jurisdiction, and the Department for Investigation and Penal Action (DIAP) in Lisbon, are the principal bodies responsi - ble for directing investigations into fraud and other forms of economic and financial crime. Under the AML framework, the DCIAP is authorised to access all relevant financial, tax, administrative, judicial, and police data necessary for the preventive investigation of money laundering and terrorist financing. The Asset Recovery Office ( Gabinete de Recuperação de Ativos – GRA) plays a pivotal role in identifying and seizing assets or proceeds linked to criminal activ - ity, both within Portugal and internationally. It also facilitates co-operation with counterpart agencies in other jurisdictions. The Public Prosecutor’s Office may apply for the extended confiscation of assets in favour of the state, targeting individuals under investigation for serious offences, as defined in Law No 5/2002 and Law No 45/2011.
In practice, courts have consolidated the distinction between “classic” confiscation (loss of specific instru - ments, products and advantages of the crime under the Penal Code) and extended confiscation, which covers assets not directly linked to a proven individual offence but deemed to result from criminal activity based on this presumption. The Court of Appeal case law between 2023 and 2025 has repeatedly confirmed that, in the extended regime, the prosecution must prove: • its incongruence with lawful income, while the defence bears the burden of rebutting the pre - sumption as to the lawful origin of the incongruent assets. At the policy level, the government’s multi-annual programme of Grandes Opções 2025–2029 expressly calls for the strengthening of instruments on depri - vation of criminal proceeds, “namely through a new mechanism of extended confiscation of assets”, and for further strengthening of the Asset Recovery and Asset Management Offices. As of early 2026, how - ever, this remains at the level of legislative intent: no comprehensive new statute overhauling the regime of Law No 5/2002 has yet entered into force, and extend - ed confiscation continues to be governed by that law as interpreted and applied by the courts. Draft proposals under discussion envisage, in particu - lar: • easing the requirement to show a direct link between specific crimes and the benefits obtained, by focusing confiscation on the nature of the asset rather than its value – even in cases where underly - ing offences have not been fully established; • conviction for a catalogue offence; • the existence of patrimony; and • enabling confiscation where criminal proceedings have become time-barred, the defendant has died or has been amnestied, through an autonomous procedure determining the disposition of the asset; and • introducing a new procedural party – the “affected person” – who may be impacted by decisions on seizure, freezing or confiscation and who would be granted participatory rights in the proceedings.
279 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook