REFORM FORFEITURE LAW

"Life, liberty and property" is the way philosopher John Locke put it.
"Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is the way Thomas Jefferson, in
the Declaration of Independence, later put it. Either way, property clearly
is important to a state of freedom and liberty. That's why an initiative
petition that would mildly limit property seizure in Utah is important.
Hopefully, its backers have secured enough signatures for it to be placed on
November's general election ballot.

Thursday was the deadline. A decision on ballot certification is due by July
6. The proposal would not require a criminal conviction in a court of law as
a prerequisite for property seizure.

It would simply raise the standard of proof before law enforcement could
help itself to people's property. Currently, Utah's forfeiture laws are
quite liberal -- and inimical to the spirit of the U.S. Constitution. Police
can seize all manner of property allegedly used in crime.

The proposed reform is compatible with federal reforms approved by Congress
last month. A significant part of the proposal would end the practice of
allowing police to profit from property seizures.

Proceeds could be used to compensate crime victims or pay legal fees of
innocent victims of the forfeiture law, but police could not claim the
proceeds or a portion thereof.

This eliminates a latent incentive for abuse. Also, the initiative would
protect the property rights of "innocent owners" or lien holders of
property, like a car, being used by another party in crime. Lawmakers had an
opportunity to reform Utah's forfeiture law earlier this year, but declined
to do so after the Legislative Auditor General reported a study of its
application found no abuses.

However, the auditor recommended greater control over how police and
prosecutors account for and spend the proceeds. This sort of half measure
does not go nearly far enough to protect the due process rights of property
owners. If backers have secured enough signatures of registered voters --
67,188 -- to get it on the ballot, citizens should vote for it next fall. If
not, lawmakers should revisit the issue next January. The ability of the
people to be secure in their property is too important to the concept of
liberty for this issue to remain neglected.