Stresses that the criminal economy is much more cash‐intensive than the legitimate economy, and explains why. Indicates the scope of the problem for crime control: that carrying illegal proceeds as cash across national border remains an important method of money laundering. Outlines the provisions of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 concerning powers to allow searches for cash, and the standard of proof required. Discusses the different types of evidence allowed: avoidance of the usual banking channels, previous convictions and acquittals, lack of business records, lack of an audit trail, credibility, presence of items indicating crime, criminal associates, lying and inconsistent statements, contamination of the cash by drugs, suspicious denomination of banknotes, attempts at concealment, travel destinations and arrangements, financial background, failure to cooperate, and confidential informants. Goes on to cash seizures under terrorist legislation, possible challenges to seizures as contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, the choice between civil and criminal forfeiture, and how the investigation proceeds.
Contesting human rights through institutional reform: the case of the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission