Key Takeaways
- • Radha Stirling, founder of Detained in Dubai and Due Process International, warns that the UAE's expanded capital markets legislation and 2026 Virtual Assets Framework could expose foreign crypto and tech entrepreneurs to criminal prosecution, fines and asset seizures.
- • The Capital Market Authority has broadened regulated virtual asset activities from three to eight, including custody, arranging transactions, investment advice, portfolio management and operating trading facilities.
- • Federal Decree-Law No. 33 of 2025 provides for imprisonment and fines reaching AED 250 million for certain unlicensed financial activities, with Article 73 allowing confiscation of funds and Article 74 extending liability to executives, advisers and other participants.
- • Stirling argues that commercial disputes, such as complaints from disgruntled investors or former partners, could escalate into criminal investigations that threaten a company's survival even without a conviction.
- • Stirling calls for greater transparency on asset seizures, independent enforcement oversight, effective judicial remedies and safeguards against commercial complaints being weaponised.
Summary
Radha Stirling, a crypto and technology justice specialist who founded Detained in Dubai, Due Process International and the Crypto Legal Advocacy Network (CLAN), warns that sweeping UAE cryptocurrency regulations could expose foreign entrepreneurs to criminal prosecution, enormous fines and asset seizures. Her warning is set against what she describes as a history of commercial disputes escalating into criminal allegations, asset freezes, travel bans and detention.
Under the UAE's expanded capital markets legislation and 2026 Virtual Assets Framework, the Capital Market Authority has increased the regulated virtual asset activities from three to eight. These now include cryptocurrency dealing, custody, arranging custody and investment transactions, investment advice, portfolio management and operating trading facilities. Businesses that arrange transactions or advise clients may fall within licensing requirements even if they do not run a conventional exchange. Federal Decree-Law No. 33 of 2025 provides for criminal penalties for certain unlicensed financial activities, including potential imprisonment and fines of up to AED 250 million. Article 73 allows courts to order confiscation of funds and seized assets after criminal proceedings, and Article 74 extends penalties to individuals who collude in, instigate or participate in violations, potentially reaching executives, advisers and consultants.
Stirling warns that the expanded definition of regulated activity creates particular risk where business relationships deteriorate. A company that regards itself as providing technology or consultancy services could be found to be conducting unlicensed investment advice or transaction arranging. A complaint from a disgruntled investor, commercial rival or former partner could trigger an investigation, and even without a conviction the process could threaten the business. She argues that the central concern is who controls the investigation and whether an entrepreneur can protect their business and assets while defending themselves.
Stirling draws parallels with Dubai's earlier investment booms, noting that after the 2008 financial crisis many investors faced criminal proceedings over debts and financial disputes, and some could not leave the country. She says Detained in Dubai has assisted entrepreneurs who presented proposals to individuals connected to the royal family, government institutions and influential Emirati investors, only to find their ideas appropriated. Some have fled the country to avoid possible imprisonment, and she notes that individuals outside the UAE may face difficulty recovering assets or be placed on INTERPOL notices.
Stirling calls for greater transparency around asset seizures, independent oversight of enforcement, effective judicial remedies and safeguards against commercial complaints being weaponised. She acknowledges that legitimate regulation is necessary to combat fraud, money laundering and financial crime, but argues that the UAE provides insufficient protection against misuse of these laws. The article does not include a response from UAE authorities.
Under the UAE's expanded capital markets legislation and 2026 Virtual Assets Framework, the Capital Market Authority has increased the regulated virtual asset activities from three to eight. These now include cryptocurrency dealing, custody, arranging custody and investment transactions, investment advice, portfolio management and operating trading facilities. Businesses that arrange transactions or advise clients may fall within licensing requirements even if they do not run a conventional exchange. Federal Decree-Law No. 33 of 2025 provides for criminal penalties for certain unlicensed financial activities, including potential imprisonment and fines of up to AED 250 million. Article 73 allows courts to order confiscation of funds and seized assets after criminal proceedings, and Article 74 extends penalties to individuals who collude in, instigate or participate in violations, potentially reaching executives, advisers and consultants.
Stirling warns that the expanded definition of regulated activity creates particular risk where business relationships deteriorate. A company that regards itself as providing technology or consultancy services could be found to be conducting unlicensed investment advice or transaction arranging. A complaint from a disgruntled investor, commercial rival or former partner could trigger an investigation, and even without a conviction the process could threaten the business. She argues that the central concern is who controls the investigation and whether an entrepreneur can protect their business and assets while defending themselves.
Stirling draws parallels with Dubai's earlier investment booms, noting that after the 2008 financial crisis many investors faced criminal proceedings over debts and financial disputes, and some could not leave the country. She says Detained in Dubai has assisted entrepreneurs who presented proposals to individuals connected to the royal family, government institutions and influential Emirati investors, only to find their ideas appropriated. Some have fled the country to avoid possible imprisonment, and she notes that individuals outside the UAE may face difficulty recovering assets or be placed on INTERPOL notices.
Stirling calls for greater transparency around asset seizures, independent oversight of enforcement, effective judicial remedies and safeguards against commercial complaints being weaponised. She acknowledges that legitimate regulation is necessary to combat fraud, money laundering and financial crime, but argues that the UAE provides insufficient protection against misuse of these laws. The article does not include a response from UAE authorities.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.