LIMITATIONS OF POWER

It was, said Rep. Henry Hyde, "a throwback to the old Soviet system,
where justice is the justice of the government, and the citizen
doesn't have a chance."

Hyde, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, was referring to a
1984 anti-drug law that allowed federal agents and police wide leeway
to seize property and use the proceeds to finance their budgets.

Hyde sponsored a bill limiting seizures that was passed recently by
Congress, approved by President Clinton and supported by such diverse
groups as the Trial Lawyers Association, the American Civil Liberties
Union and the National Rifle Association.

The 1984 law authorized seizure based on nothing more than "probable
cause" to suspect the property was involved in criminal activity.
Owners did not have to be convicted or even charged with implication
in a crime.

In fact, in more than 80 percent of seizure cases, criminal charges
were never brought. So Hyde's description was on target. The old law
was embarrassingly close to the Soviet way of doing things. Not
incidentally, it proved a windfall for crime-fighting agencies.

The annual flow of cash, houses, sports cars, vehicles and other
assets to the Justice Department escalated from $27 million in 1985 to
$449 million in 1998. Local authorities could act on their own or,
when involved in a federal case, get a share of the proceeds.

Law enforcement groups opposed amending the law, saying it would
devastate department budgets and make it easier for drug dealers to
escape punishment.

In numerous instances, however, the 1984 law was exploited and
innocent people were wronged. Often they had no knowledge of illegal
activities. Parents had their homes seized because a son was growing
marijuana on the property. Families were evicted because a member was
charged with drug abuse. A man lost his business because a drug
peddler was caught plying his trade in a restroom.

In one particularly egregious case, a Florida family had its
4,000-acre ranch seized on suspicion it was a landing strip for a
drug-carrying plane that crashed nearby. It took the family four years
and thousands of dollars to get the property back. A court ruled the
police had no reason to believe the family knew of any drug flights.

The new law would make it easier for government to seize property once
the owner is convicted of a crime. But minus a conviction, the
government must prove the property had been used for criminal activity
or was bought with the proceeds from a crime. Should the owner
challenge the confiscation, the government must present a
"preponderance of evidence" that the property was substantially
connected with criminal activity.

The law also eliminates a requirement that owners challenging
confiscation must post a cash bond worth 10 percent of the property's
value.

Hyde battled seven years to impose limits on seizure power. That he
has finally succeeded is a tribute to his persistence and to the
belated, but still welcome, common sense of Congress.