独立的没收制度，在英美法系国家一般称为民事没收（civil recovery），在大陆法系国家一般称为未定罪没收（confiscation without conviction），是不以对行为人的刑事定罪为没收前提的一种财产没收制度。该制度的突出特点是其诉讼对象是物，即犯罪收益；它可以在没有刑事案件的情况下没收财产，即使被告人已经死亡、失踪或在逃，甚至即便尚不知违法行为是何人所实施，只要有足够的证据，按照一定的证明标准，能够证明被没收的财产来源于违法所得即可。在我国的刑事法律中，对涉案财物的没收，以被告人被判定有罪为前提条件。同时，除某些违禁品及犯罪工具外，我国刑事诉讼法没有赋予公安机关和人民检察院在侦查和审查起诉过程中没收犯罪所得的权利。因此，如果犯罪嫌疑人或者被告人在侦查或者起诉阶段死亡、潜逃或者失踪，刑事诉讼将因此终止或者中止，即使有证据证明有关财物属于犯罪所得或将用于实施犯罪，在涉案人员未被依法定罪之前，公安机关及检察机关也不可能将涉案财产没收。在附带民事诉讼与刑事案件一并审判的前提下，法院也不可能应有关部门或者被害人的要求，针对死亡、在逃或者失踪者的犯罪收益，做出没收、返还或者赔偿损失的裁决。这使得近在咫尺的正义，因为法律规定的空白而无法得到伸张，留下巨大遗憾。我国已经批准并加入2003年《联合国反腐败公约》，根据该公约第54条第1款第3项的要求：“各缔约国均应当根据其本国法律考虑采取必要的措施，以便在犯罪嫌疑人死亡、潜逃或者缺席而无法对其起诉的情形或者其他有关情形下，能够不经过刑事定罪而没收这类财产。”这实际是对定罪之外的独立的没收制度的肯定。这一点对我国来说，具有很大的现实意义。因为在我国司法实践中，案犯作案后携巨款潜逃国外或“人间蒸发”的现象愈加突出，针对在逃或失踪犯罪嫌疑人的刑事诉讼难以继续进行，法院更不可能未经审判就做出有罪判决。由此，对物的追诉本身就成为一项重要的诉讼活动。如果能够在我国刑事法律中确立独立的没收制度，不仅能够很好的贯彻《联合国反腐败公约》的要求，还能在很大程度上解决对外逃或失踪人员因无法判决而不能追回犯罪资产的问题。独立的没收制度是我国现行没收制度的有力补充和完善，无论从没收法的国际发展趋势来看还是从满足我国司法实践的现实需要来看，建立我国独立的没收制度都是一项迫切且意义重大的举措。 本文从比较法的角度，在分析研究外国未定罪没收法的基础上，对建立我国独立的没收制度提出自己的观点。

Confiscation without conviction is one kind of property confiscation, which is not premised on a criminal conviction. The salient features of the system is that the object of litigation is thing, that is proceeds of Crime; It can be applied where Criminal cases does not exist, even if the defendant has died, disappeared or absconded, or even do not know yet who has implemented the offense, as long as there is sufficient evidence, according to a certain standard of proof, to prove that the property confiscated comes from illegal activities. In the criminal laws of our county, the confiscation of the property involved is depended on a criminal conviction. Meanwhile, in addition to some of the contraband and criminal tools, Criminal Procedure Law does not give the Public security authorities and Prosecution the right to confiscate proceeds of crime. Therefore, if the criminal suspects or defendants died, escaped or disappeared, the case will be terminated or suspended in the investigation or prosecution stage. In this case, even if there is evidence to prove that the property Belong to the illegal income or will be used to commit the crime, because that the perpetrator has Not been convicted, that the Public security authorities and the Prosecution cannot confiscate the property. While the ancillary civil bill and the criminal cases are adjudicated in conjunction, the court cannot make a confiscation, return or compensation order to the proceeds of crime to satisfy the demands of the related departments and the victims when the violator has died, escaped or disappeared. This makes the justice because of the gaps in the law, cannot be realized, leaving a huge regret.China has ratified and acceded to “United Nations Convention against Corruption” in 2003.According to article 54, paragraph 1, item 3 of the Convention, it request: “ Each State Party, in order to provide mutual legal assistance pursuant to article 55 of this Convention with respect to property acquired through or involved in the commission of an offence established in accordance with this Convention, shall, in accordance with its domestic law: Consider taking such measures as may be necessary to allow confiscation of such property without a criminal conviction in cases in which the offender cannot be prosecuted by reason of death, flight or absence or in other appropriate cases.” This actually is affirmation of the Confiscation without conviction. It is of great practical significance for our country. Because in judicial practice in our country, the phenomenon that the criminals fled abroad with huge sum of property after committing the crime or “disappeared” even be more serious, it is quite difficulty to continue with the criminal proceedings, and the court cannot give judgments without trial. Thus, the prosecution in rem itself has become an important litigation. If we established the Confiscation without conviction in our criminal laws, it would not only well implement the "United Nations Convention against Corruption" requirements, but also to a large extent address the problems that the court cannot make effective confiscation decision when the violator died, escaped or disappeared after committing the crime.Confiscation without conviction is of great supplement and improvement for the forfeiture system in our country, it is not only consistent with the international trends of the development of the forfeiture law, but also meets the practical needs of our judicial practice. So establishing Confiscation without conviction in our country is an urgent and significant major initiative. From the perspective of comparative law, this article analysis and studies the related forfeiture laws of foreign countries, and on this bases, the writer put forward its own point of view on the establishment of Confiscation without conviction in our country.