RECLAIMING JUSTICE

Few prosecutorial tools have been more open to abuse than federal
civil-forfeiture laws. The horror stories of innocent people deprived
of their property on the mere suspicion of wrongdoing have piled up
over the years. Congress, to its credit, has finally acted.

The bill that cleared the House April 11 goes a long way toward
rebalancing the scales of justice. It establishes a much higher
threshold before prosecutors can seize property that may be involved
in crime. Until now, a bare showing of probable cause was adequate.
Under the new law - which President Clinton has agreed to sign - the
government must show a substantial connection between seized
belongings and a crime.

In addition, the new law will allow judges to order the release of
property if its seizure causes significant hardship. In the past, even
people proved innocent have had trouble regaining seized goods.

Forfeiture laws have at times been instrumental in shutting down drug
traffickers, money launderers, and other crooks. They were instituted
30 years ago when concerns about narcotics and terrorism were
mounting. With needed restraints built in, they still have a place.

But the examples of flagrant misuse - from the Vermont woman who lost
10 acres of land for three years because her daughter had secretly
grown a marijuana patch on them to the Houston hotel owner whose
building was seized because some patrons, unknown to him, had been
using drugs on the premises - left no doubt the law had to be changed.

Those in Congress - such as House Judiciary Committee chairman Henry
Hyde, who saw the need and persisted for years to bring about change -
deserve thanks. Both Republicans, like Mr. Hyde, and Democrats were
prominent in the effort.

The often cavalier application of civil forfeiture, and the resulting
damage to innocent people, has for too long been an affront to
American justice.