FORFEITURE ACT AN 'ATTACK ON RIGHTS'

Under The New Act, The Government Can Seize Property And Liquidate
It, With Proceeds Going To The Treasury

As the provincial government gears up to use a new law allowing it to
seize property, goods or cash acquired through illegal actions, the
B.C. Civil Liberties Association is decrying the legislation as an
attack on the rights of British Columbians.

"How could this be anything other than an outrageous end run around a
person's Charter rights?" said Micheal Vonn, policy director of the
B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

The controversial Civil Forfeiture Act, which came into force April
20, enables the government to seize property such as cars, boats and
houses, which can then be liquidated with the proceeds going to the province.

Steve Ing, deputy director of the Civil Forfeiture Office, said his
office is already working on more than a half-dozen cases under the
new act. To date, no cases have yet been filed in court, although
lawyers employed by the government's legal services branch have been
assigned to the office, Ing said.

Vonn said the law is a provincial government attempt to circumvent
the federal Charter of Rights "by recharacterizing what we would
consider essentially criminal procedures as civil."

It will result in a lower standard of proof required to seize assets
and also potentially limit the rights of individuals to legal
representation, she said.

Vonn added that even people who support the concept of this law might
be concerned that somebody's assets can now be seized without a
single criminal or provincial statute charge being laid against them.

According to Ing, the office will typically act on information from
police or another regulatory government agency. If the office
determines through its own review that it has a case for civil
seizure, it will then file an application in B.C. Supreme Court for a
civil judgment against the property.

A judge will decide through a trial whether the government has proven
its case based on the civil standard of a "balance of probabilities"
rather than the more stringent criminal standard of "beyond a
reasonable doubt."

While the case proceeds, government can also seek an interim
preservation order, which freezes the assets.

Vonn said there are several problems with the legislation. There is
no sound reason for the law, she said, because there was already a
federal proceeds of crime law in place.

But this bill gives B.C. control over seized assets rather than
Ottawa. "This is the province getting their foot in the door on
collecting some of these proceeds for themselves," Vonn said.

Ing said seized assets will be put into a special account and used
for crime prevention, compensating eligible victims and remediating
property damage. But Vonn said there is nothing in the law stopping
this money from being put into general government revenue. Vonn said
the bill is also "over-broad in a number of ways" including the way
it defines property that can be seized and allows seizure for "any
offence under a provincial or federal law."

The result is not a bill aimed at organized crime as government
touted, she added.

"Under this language, your car could be subject to civil forfeiture
because you were demonstrated, on a balance of probabilities, to have
been speeding," said Vonn.