Have you heard or watched a movie about Al Capone? People know him as the big boss of a famous gangster in America. Hagan (2006) proposed a term to describe the crime organisation as Organised Crime and the activities as organised crime. However, there is some definition of organised crime (von Lampe, n.d.) and experts cannot agree on which definition is most appropriate to describe organised crime (Paoli, 2002).
The use of definition will have implications for the results for law enforcement practitioners and academic researchers. Consequently, academic researchers and law practitioners should understand the differences between the terms to minimise the results’ mistakes. Kleemans (2014) found six theoretical approaches relating to organised crime. However, this essay will explain three major variances of definitions that often appear in research and public debate and the implication of using the terms.
The definition of organised crime as bureaucracy model. Cressey (1969) interpreted organised crime as a formal structure and the functions of a crime family. UNODC (n.d.) defines a hierarchical model as a group of interdependent actors in which there is an exact ranking among participants that distinguishes leaders from other members in the criminal enterprise. Another definition, von Lampe (2016) described the bureaucracy model of organised crime as illegal activities managed and approved by superiors then carried out by lower-level operatives group members. According to the definitions, organised crime is defined as a structural organisation of the criminal group.
The definition of organised crime as illegal enterprise theory. UNODC (n.d.) realised that the regulatory framework and economic factors were the primary determinants behind organised criminal groups’ formation. Next, Schelling (1971) identified that organised crime conducted unlawful business methods monopolisation, terrorism, extortion and tax evasion. Furthermore, FBI (n.d.) defines organised crime is an association of self-perpetuating individuals who commit to obtain power, influence, and monetary and/or commercial gain, in whole or in part by illegal means. From the definitions, organised crime can be concluded as a group of individuals committing illegal activities or crime for financial/commercial gain.
From the model definitions above, the definition of organised crime can be seen as the bureaucracy model which focuses on how organised criminal groups are organised and the enterprise model focuses on how organised criminal activities are organised (UNODC, n.d.). Moreover, Paoli (2002) argued that the provision of illegal commodities and criminal organisations need to be separated.
Another model suggested by Hagan (1983) is organised crime continuum model. The organised crime model proposed is viewed as a matter of degree than the concept as a matter of kind. An organised crime should consist of highly organised dimensions, violence or threats of violence, provision of illicit goods in public demand and immunity. In line with Hagan’s continuum model, Finckenauer (2005) offers that the framework of organised crime or criminal organisation has an ideology, structure/organised hierarchy, continuity, violence/use force or threat of force, restricted membership/bonding, illegal enterprises, penetration of legitimate business and corruption.
From the definitions of organised crime, there are some implicationsfor law enforcement practitioners and academic researchers. For law enforcement practitioners, to accused someone conducting a crime is based on the law definition. In the term of organised crime, Italy’s anti-mafia law defines that someone can be charged as a criminal if he/she being a member of a Mafia-type organisation (Finckenauer, 2005) and seize/confiscate all the possessions belonging to him/her (Santino, 2015). In another country, e.g. United States of America, the FBI uses RICO act to expand criminal accountability from a single predicate offence across multiple members of an illegal enterprise (FBI, n.d.; Finckenauer, 2005). Unfortunately, being a member of an organised crime cannot be accused as a criminal.
However, more problems come when the perpetrators, proceeds of crime, and evidence are overseas. To extradite a fugitive or confiscate proceeds of crime or exchange evidence between countries falls in double criminality principle (Blaas, 2003). Double criminality means that conduct would constitute a criminal offence in both the surrendering and the requesting state (Law Insider, n.d.). For instance, Italy cannot request extradition for someone in the US when he/she is only a member of a Mafia-type organisation without doing illegal/crime activity because it does not constitute a crime in both countries. Italy can only request extradition if he/she committed an illegal/crime activity.
To combat organised crime all over party members, UNODC (n.d.) defines an organised criminal group using four criteria as follow:
- A structured group of three or more persons;
- The group exists for a while;
- It acts in concert to commit at least one serious crime;
- To obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefits.
Whatever the definition of organised crime on the party’s law, party members can request extradition when it falls to the criteria.
Next, for academics and researchers who are willing to understand organised crime, the definition becomes essential. When performing research, the definition should be stated on their methodology (Bryman, 2016). Because of many definitions of organised crime, there must be some similarity to insure the same meaning; therefore, their definition will shape the audiences’ views and opinions (Finckenauer, 2005). Therefore, when a researcher uses a definition which has fewer similarities with other definitions, there is a chance that the research would be excluded from organised crime subject.
In conclusion, organised crime has many definitions, and there is no agreement on which definition is the best to describe the activity and organisation. The three models of definition often appear in research, and public debate is bureaucracy, illegal enterprise and continuum model. Consequently, the definition has its implications and problematics for law practitioners and academic researchers.
References
Blaas, F.-C. (2003). DOUBLE CRIMINALITY IN INTERNATIONAL EXTRADITION LAW. 128.
Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press.
Cressey, D. R. (1969). Theft of the Nation: The Structure and Operations of Organized Crime in America. Transaction Publishers.
FBI. (n.d.). Organized Crime [Folder]. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Retrieved January 2, 2021, from https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/organized-crime
Finckenauer, J. O. (2005). Problems of definition: What is organized crime? Trends in Organized Crime, 8(3), 63–83.
Hagan, F. E. (1983). The Organized Crime Continuum: A Further Specification of a New Conceptual Model. Criminal Justice Review, 8(2), 52–57. https://doi.org/10.1177/073401688300800209
Hagan, F. E. (2006). “Organized crime” and “organized crime”: Indeterminate problems of definition. Trends in Organized Crime, 9(4), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12117-006-1017-4
Kleemans, E. R. (2014). Theoretical Perspectives on Organized Crime (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199730445.013.005
Law Insider. (n.d.). Law Insider. Retrieved January 2, 2021, from https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/dual-criminality
Paoli, L. (2002). The paradoxes of organized crime. Crime, Law and Social Change, 37(1), 51–97. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013355122531
Santino, U. (2015, March 2). Fighting the Mafia and Organized Crime: Italy and Europe. Centro Impastato. https://www.centroimpastato.com/fighting-the-mafia-and-organized-crime-italy-and-europe/
SCHELLING, T. C. (1971). What Is the Business of Organized Crime? The American Scholar, 40(4), 643–652.
UNODC. (n.d.). Organized Crime Module 1 Key Issues: Defining Organized Crime. Retrieved January 2, 2021, from //www.unodc.org
von Lampe, K. (n.d.). Organized Crime Defined. Retrieved January 2, 2021, from http://www.organized-crime.de/organizedcrimedefinitions.htm
von Lampe, K. (2016). The Ties That Bind: A Taxonomy of Associational Criminal Structures. In G. A. Antonopoulos (Ed.), Illegal Entrepreneurship, Organized Crime and Social Control: Essays in Honor of Professor Dick Hobbs (pp. 19–35). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31608-6_2