《刑法典》第 55(4)条规定强制没收犯罪所得及在洗钱和上游犯罪过程中所使用 的或企图使用的工具。然而，根据判例法，只有被判定犯有洗钱罪之后才能适 用《刑法典》第 55(4)条。在未定罪情况下，只能适用《刑法典》第 55(3)条，该条款的覆盖范围更窄，因为其只涵盖严重和特别严重的犯罪。此外，根据 《刑法典》第 55(3)条，不存在价值没收。法律草案规定的新充公原则将适用于 所有可能导致获取犯罪所得的犯罪。除洗钱之外，亚美尼亚未实施《反腐败公约》第三十一条第一款第二项的内 容。可根据《刑事诉讼法》采取追踪、冻结和扣押措施。亚美尼亚尚未建立专门处置被冻结、被扣押或被没收财产的资产管理机构。被没收财产会被转至国 家预算。根据《刑事诉讼法》第 236 条对被扣押的财产进行保管。 《刑法典》第 55(1)和(2)条对没收财产或部分没收财产作出了规定；财产的没收 数量将由法院决定。《刑事诉讼法》第 233 条可以在定罪之前适用。 《银行保密法》、《打击洗钱和资助恐怖主义法》、《刑事诉讼法》以及《行动和 搜查活动法》（2007 年）对银行保密问题进行了规定。在对刑事案件开展调查之 前，执法机构可以根据《行动和搜查活动法》第 29 条，获得属于金融保密，包 括银行保密范畴的信息。在刑事案件调查开始之后，执法机构可以根据《银行 保密法》第 10 条和《刑事诉讼法》第 172 条获得此类信息。然而，由于《行动 和搜查活动法》和《刑事诉讼法》的条款与《银行保密法》有明显冲突，因此 在实践中，当“嫌疑人”或“被告”尚未确定时，执法机构在刑事案件启动之 前或调查阶段期间无法从金融机构直接获得属银行保密范畴的信息。另外，根据《银行保密法》第 13.1 条或《打击洗钱和资助恐怖主义法》第 13 条向执法机 构提供的信息似乎不能构成正式证据，因此可能无法当庭使用。由于《宪法》规定的无罪推定原则，未针对没收事宜颠倒举证责任。《刑法典》第 55 条规定保护善意第三方在没收事宜中的权利。
Article 55(4) CC foresees compulsory confiscation of the proceeds of crime and instruments used or intended for use in the commission of money-laundering and predicate offences. However, according to the case law, Article 55(4) CC can only be applied if there is a conviction for money-laundering. In the absence of such a conviction, only Article 55(3) CC is applicable, which is narrower since it only covers grave and very grave crimes. Moreover, under Article 55(3) CC, no value confiscation exists. The new institute of forfeiture stipulated by a draft law would be applicable to all crimes which may result in the acquisition of proceeds of crime. Armenia has not implemented article 31(1)(b) of the Convention against Corruption outside money-laundering. Tracing, freezing and seizing measures can be taken according to the CPC. Armenia has not established an asset management agency to specifically dispose of frozen, seized or confiscated property. Confiscated property is transferred to the State Budget. The seized property is preserved in accordance with Article 236 CPC. Article 55(1) and (2) CC provide for confiscation of property or a part thereof; the size of property confiscation is to be determined by court. Article 233 CPC will apply prior to a conviction. The issue of bank secrecy is regulated by the Law on Bank Secrecy (LBS), the Law on Combating Money-Laundering and Terrorism Financing, the CPC, and the Law on Operative and Search Activities 2007 (LOSA). Prior to the instigation of a criminal case, law enforcement bodies can obtain information covered by financial secrecy, including bank secrecy, pursuant to Article 29 LOSA. After the instigation of a criminal case, law enforcement bodies can obtain such information on the basis of Article 10 LBS and Article 172 CPC. However, due to an apparent conflict of the provisions of the LOSA and CPC with the LBS, the courts in practice make it impossible for law enforcement agencies to directly obtain information covered by bank secrecy from financial institutions prior to the initiation of a criminal case or during the investigation stage, when a “suspect” or “accused” has not yet been identified. Also, the information provided to the authorities based on Article 13.1. LBS or Article 13 of the Law on Combating Money-Laundering and Terrorism Financing does not seem to constitute formal evidence and therefore may not be used in court. The reversal of the burden of proof for purposes of confiscation has not been implemented due to the presumption of innocence under the Constitution. The rights of bona fide third parties in confiscation matters are protected under Article 55 CC.