<![CDATA[Transnational corruption erodes state sovereignty and damages global financial integrity, with annual losses estimated at USD 20–40 billion, yet less than five percent are recovered. Although frameworks like the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC) promote cooperation, the lack of harmonized standards for assessing state losses weakens asset recovery efforts. Most studies focus on asset tracing and procedural barriers, while the importance of loss assessment in legitimizing claims remains underexplored. This study adopts a qualitative normative–empirical approach through case studies in Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Brazil, and Ukraine, supported by legal analysis and expert interviews. Results reveal methodological differences: some jurisdictions depend on forensic accounting for direct financial losses, while others consider broader economic impacts, such as lost investments and reputational damage. Adopting comprehensive methods gained stronger legitimacy and higher recovery rates, although on average, only 35–40 percent of claimed assets were returned. The research reframes state loss assessment as central to asset recovery in the context of transnational corruption. By integrating deterrence theory and the transnational legal process framework, it highlights the need for harmonized standards that combine legal, economic, and forensic perspectives. The findings fill a critical gap in scholarship and provide practical guidance for policymakers to strengthen international cooperation and asset recovery mechanisms.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
