Crypto fraud and theft: Japanese requests for Canadian asset restraint and seizure
For Japanese victims and receiving police officers: RCMP cooperation, formal central-authority requests, evidence and translations, procedural-stage conditions and asset return.
এই ভাষায় নিবন্ধের মূল অংশ নেই; ইংরেজি দেখানো হচ্ছে।
## Start here: RCMP cooperation and formal treaty requests
Canada chapter for Japanese crypto-fraud/theft victims and the officers receiving their reports. Sources reviewed on 13 October 2026. The treaty entered into force on 30 August 2026. This independently prepared guide is not an official police manual or a legal determination for an individual case.
Formal requests run between central authorities: Japan’s Minister of Justice or National Public Safety Commission (or designees), and Canada’s Minister of Justice (or designees). Canada’s IAG coordinates them. A victim’s email to RCMP is not a treaty seizure request.
RCMP NC3 coordinates cybercrime investigations with international police partners. Record police cooperation separately from formal assistance requiring compulsory powers; the Canadian investigating agency depends on the case.
[外務省 — 日・加刑事共助条約・発効日](https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/ila/st/pagew_000001_02519.html) / [外務省 — 日・加刑事共助条約（和文）](https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/101004084.pdf) / [Department of Justice Canada — International Assistance Group](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/about-apropos.html) / [RCMP — National Cybercrime Coordination Centre](https://rcmp.ca/en/specialized-operations-and-intelligence/national-cybercrime-coordination-centre)
## Victims: prepare the police handover
The following is our suggested workflow. Report to police in Japan and retain the assigned department, contact route and any report/reference number. A community-safety intake may be referred to fraud or cybercrime investigators; police determine internal responsibility.
- Timeline, gross loss and any funds already returned.
- Bank and exchange exports; transaction hashes, chain, token contract, units, sending/receiving addresses, memo/tag and timestamps with time zones.
- Original chat exports, email headers, URLs, account identifiers and relevant agreements/screens.
- Earlier provider reports, reference numbers, replies and an evidence inventory recording collector and collection time.
Preserve originals and prepare copies. Explain acquisition and alterations rather than relying solely on screenshots. Never place private keys, seed phrases or passwords in public articles or ordinary email. Coordinate device changes or asset movements with investigators because they may affect preservation.
[RCMP — 460,000 USDT seizure, 23 July 2025](https://rcmp.ca/en/news/2025/07/rcmp-recover-460000-usd-tether-cryptocurrency-fraud-victim)
## Receiving officers: initial triage and headquarters handover
Our suggested handover sequence is: report and preservation → confirm case investigators and headquarters international-assistance contact → Japanese central authority → IAG → competent Canadian authorities/courts. Coordinate fraud, cybercrime and proceeds specialists and prosecutors as needed to establish responsibility and Japanese legal authority. Public sources do not establish every prefecture’s internal forms or approvers.
Prepare a one-page handover: case/reference, official contacts, alleged conduct, loss, last transfer, Canadian nexus, requested action, dissipation risk, evidence location, charge/order status, next owner and deadline. Separate suspected location from established facts.
[警察庁 — 国際的な警察活動](https://www.npa.go.jp/hakusyo/r04/honbun/html/y7731000.html) / [Department of Justice Canada — International Assistance Group](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/about-apropos.html)
## Explain the Canadian nexus with evidence
Connect evidence references to Canadian records, persons or property. Identify legal entity, corporate identifier, actual record-holder/custodian, location/province where known and account identifiers. English branding, geolocation and Canadian registration alone do not establish custody or asset location.
Suggested tracing table: transaction hash; chain/token; UTC and original timestamp; units; sender; recipient; next hop; exhibit; attribution basis and confidence. Label exchange tags and clustering as inferences, separately from facts awaiting custodian/KYC confirmation. A blockchain address has no nationality.
If location is uncertain, ask the central authority about locating property or obtaining records first. Third-country custodians require their own jurisdictional analysis.
[Department of Justice Canada — Requesting Mutual Legal Assistance](https://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/mlaguide-guideej.html)
## Separate preservation, evidence, restraint, forfeiture and return
- Record preservation retains logs; it does not necessarily stop transfers.
- Evidence gathering obtains account/KYC and transaction records lawfully.
- Restraint restricts disposal; seizure takes custody.
- Forfeiture removes property following legal proceedings.
- Return, transfer and victim compensation require separate entitlement and third-party-rights decisions. A freeze alone does not establish reimbursement.
Treaty Article 18 covers confiscation assistance and interim immobilization within Canadian law, certified court orders when required, and conditional transfer of property.
[外務省 — 日・加刑事共助条約（和文）](https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/101004084.pdf)
## Critical distinction: investigation versus enforcing foreign orders
Treaty Article 3 permits refusal where compulsory measures concern conduct that is not criminal in Canada. Describe the conduct and law, not just the Japanese offence label.
[Japan–Canada treaty / 日加刑事共助条約](https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/101004087.pdf)
Canadian MLA Act section 9.3 concerns enforcement of foreign criminal-court restraint/seizure orders. Before filing, the person must have been charged in the requesting state and the conduct must constitute an indictable offence in Canada. A victim report, civil attachment order or police letter is not automatically such an order; central authorities must assess the Japanese procedural stage.
If there is no charge or qualifying order, disclose this and ask Japan’s central authority to consult IAG on evidence gathering and any Canadian investigation/domestic measures available. Do not promise immediate treaty freezing or omit section 9.3 conditions.
Section 9.4 requires conviction, an indictable Canadian equivalent and no further appeal against conviction/order for foreign forfeiture registration. Third-party notice and interests also matter. Do not substitute interim restraint requirements for final forfeiture conditions.
[Canada — Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, section 9.3](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-13.6/section-9.3.html) / [Canada — Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, section 9.4](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-13.6/section-9.4.html)
## Urgency: prepare the request while addressing dissipation
Record concrete ongoing transfers, balance movement or impending deletion, last observation and deadline with reasons. Link urgency to transactions/logs rather than merely writing “urgent”. Escalate promptly to the case and international-assistance owners for central-authority consultation.
As a practical option, verify the custodian’s official law-enforcement route and rules for voluntary preservation/restrictions. Cooperation is not guaranteed and does not replace compulsory process. Track type, scope, expiry, reference, acknowledgment and required follow-up legal process.
Central authorities coordinate electronic communication and written confirmation. Do not send bulk personal information to an unverified RCMP contact.
[外務省 — 日・加刑事共助条約（和文）](https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/101004084.pdf) / [RCMP — 460,000 USDT seizure, 23 July 2025](https://rcmp.ca/en/news/2025/07/rcmp-recover-460000-usd-tether-cryptocurrency-fraud-victim)
## Request structure and attachments
Use Treaty Article 4 and Canada’s guide, then conform to the Japanese central authority’s form. This preparation checklist is not an official application. Attach English or French translations unless central authorities agree otherwise.
1. Case, competent authority, requesting authority and official contacts.
2. Allegations, procedural stage and linked evidence.
3. Applicable Japanese law and Canadian compulsory-measure analysis.
4. Canadian nexus, persons/property/custodian and identifiers.
5. Exact action, date range, records and purpose.
6. Urgency, deadline, confidentiality and pre-disclosure consultation.
7. Certification and acquisition requirements.
8. Certified orders where required, charge/conviction/appeal status.
Suggested exhibits: A timeline; B loss/transfer ledger; C tracing table; D Canadian nexus; E originals/acquisition log; F statutes; G orders/procedural status; H translations/exhibit crosswalk. Use matching exhibit references and distinguish conversions, duplicate entries and reimbursements. Limit requested custodian records by account, date and type; mark unknown retention explicitly.
[外務省 — 日・加刑事共助条約（和文）](https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/101004084.pdf) / [Department of Justice Canada — Requesting Mutual Legal Assistance](https://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/mlaguide-guideej.html) / [Canada — Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, section 9.3](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-13.6/section-9.3.html) / [Canada — Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, section 9.4](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-13.6/section-9.4.html)
## English consultation memo for central-authority review
Our consultation memo is neither an official form nor a submitted request. Replace placeholders with evidence and obtain Japanese central-authority review. Disclose missing orders and uncertain location.
**Subject:** Japan–Canada MLA consultation — alleged cryptocurrency fraud/theft — [case reference].
**Competent authority / official contact:** [agency, officer, official route].
**Allegations and stage:** [conduct, dates, Japanese provisions; investigation/charge status; exhibits].
**Canadian nexus:** [custodian/property/person, location and evidence; unknowns].
**Requested assistance:** [records, identifiers, date range and certification]; [restraint/seizure, legal basis and certified order, if available].
**Urgency / confidentiality:** [specific dissipation or deletion evidence, deadline, reason; consultation requested before disclosure].
**Legal-stage question:** [no charge/order yet, or precise charge/order status]. Please advise which assistance and supporting material may be available or required under Canadian law.
**Attachments / translation:** [exhibit index and English/French translations].
**Existing Canadian police contact:** [verified reference, or none].
[Department of Justice Canada — Requesting Mutual Legal Assistance](https://canada.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/mlaguide-guideej.html)
## Published IAG contact and transmission tracking
IAG’s published contact, checked 13 October 2026: Cdncentralauthority@justice.gc.ca; +1 613 957 4832; International Assistance Group, Department of Justice, 284 Wellington Street, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0H8. Canada instructs foreign law enforcement to contact its own central authority. This is not a victim reimbursement desk.
Recheck the official page before transmission. Japan’s central authority should agree a secure attachment route. Privately track addressee, document revision, sent date, acknowledgment, Canadian reference, supplements, preservation expiry and next follow-up. Receipt is a separate status from execution, seizure and return.
[Department of Justice Canada — International Assistance Group](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/emla-eej/about-apropos.html)
## After seizure: return, compensation and civil proceedings
Maintain evidence of entitlement and loss. Ask case investigators/prosecutors about custody, applicable return/compensation procedure, filing authority, deadlines and ownership documents. Forfeiture, interstate transfer and victim distribution are separate decisions; competing victims and legitimate third parties may matter.
Criminal assistance is separate from a victim’s civil litigation or attachment. Discuss provincial jurisdiction, defendant/property identification, security/costs and foreign judgments with Canadian counsel. This chapter does not prescribe civil filing requirements or guarantee recovery.
In July 2025 RCMP reported seizing about 460,000 USDT under a Special Warrant for Digital Assets, with Tether cooperation. That individual Canadian case is not evidence of a Japanese MLA success rate, turnaround or support for every token.
[外務省 — 日・加刑事共助条約（和文）](https://www.mofa.go.jp/mofaj/files/101004084.pdf) / [Canada — Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, section 9.4](https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/M-13.6/section-9.4.html) / [RCMP — 460,000 USDT seizure, 23 July 2025](https://rcmp.ca/en/news/2025/07/rcmp-recover-460000-usd-tether-cryptocurrency-fraud-victim)
## Final checks and unresolved inputs
- Evidence of Canadian nexus and actual custodian identified?
- Preservation, evidence, restraint, seizure or forfeiture action specified?
- Investigation, charge, order and appeal status accurately stated?
- English/French translations, exhibit references and evidentiary links complete?
- Dissipation basis, deadlines, confidentiality and secure route confirmed?
- Owners, acknowledgment, supplements and pre-expiry follow-up assigned?
Internal Japanese forms/approvals, case-specific Canadian powers, actual location/balances, retention, turnaround, costs and return eligibility/deadlines remain case-dependent. Record verifier, date and answers privately. Never publish personal case numbers, accounts, ID documents or original case evidence.
Related victim explanation: [Mithril Blog](https://blog.mithril.fund/canada-crypto-assets-japan-mla?lang=en). This Canada chapter does not replace other countries’ procedures.
Indexed operational reference for officers: [Mithril Knowledge](https://knowledge.mithril.fund/wiki/research/canada-crypto-assets-japan-mla?lang=en)