ONTARIO CRIMINALS PAY HEFTY PRICE FOR MISDEEDS

Street racers, crack houses, marijuana grow-ops, cash - you name it,
the Ontario government has seized it using controversial forfeiture
legislation.

According to a forthcoming report prepared for the attorney general's
ministry, Ontario police departments have made 170 seizures over the
past four years, snatching $3.6 million in property and freezing an
additional $11.5 million in assets.

The 17-page review is the first comprehensive examination of the
impact of the Civil Remedies Act, which the former Progressive
Conservative government introduced in 2001.

It reveals that almost $1 million has been distributed directly to
crime victims and more than $900,000 has gone to crime prevention
programs and upgrading police equipment.

Attorney General Michael Bryant said since the Liberals succeeded the
Tories in 2003 they have exploited former Progressive Conservative
attorney general Jim Flaherty's landmark legislation.

"We've sought to use (the powers) in ways that were consistent with
the legislation, but might not have been in Flaherty's mind when they
introduced it," Bryant said in an interview.

Ontario was the first province in Canada to enact such a law, but
Quebec, British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba, and Saskatchewan have
since passed or introduced similar legislation.

"When we came into office, from my perspective it seemed as if the
bill hadn't really been used much at all," said Bryant.

"We made an effort to do two things. Firstly, to send officials from
the ministry around to different police departments across the
province to inform them of this new tool that many of them were
unaware of. The police have to take the first step and, as a result of
that, more activity took place," the attorney general said.

"Secondly, I'll admit I'm ripping a page out of the RICO book in the
United States," he said, referring to the federal U.S. Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act used against mobsters.

Bryant said the RICO-like strategy has allowed police to grab a
variety of assets and send a chill through organized crime syndicates.

"We're trying to take away the instruments of unlawful activity,
whether it's a crack house, a grow-op, or a street-racing car, a biker
gang clubhouse or a gun or money used to finance the operation."

But the Eliot Ness-style tactics have also sparked concern from civil
libertarians and other critics who worry that the long arm of the law
is a tad too overreaching.

In May, the legislation survived a high-profile challenge before
Ontario's highest court.

The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled it is lawful to seize property
obtained through illegal activity even if the owner has not been
convicted of a crime.

Ontario's Criminal Lawyers' Association and Robin Chatterjee - a man
on bail who had $29,000 in cash and some grow-op-style gear
confiscated after he was stopped by York Region police in 2003 while
driving without a front licence plate - argued the seizure was
unconstitutional.

While the money, lights, and exhaust fan smelled of marijuana, no
drugs were found and Chatterjee was never charged with any narcotics
offence.

Still, police and the province were successful in taking away his
property.

Bryant said weathering the court challenge was significant.

"We're really right now on the cusp of exponential growth in the use
of civil forfeiture as police services begin to use it in the ways
that the precedents have set now that Ontario's highest court has
ruled that it is constitutional," Bryant added.

"The reality is that just as organized crime has become more
organized, our justice system needs to become more organized.
Organized justice means that we need civil tools to seek remedies that
attack the property and not the individual."

New Democrat MPP Peter Kormos (Niagara Centre) said he appreciates the
value of the legislation as a law-enforcement tool, but warned of
possible drawbacks.

"We know that there's a crisis - chaos - in the Criminal Injuries
Compensation Board ... in terms of the hoops that people are forced to
jump through, more often than not, to access any compensation," he
said.

That refers to a review now underway by former Ontario chief justice
Roy McMurtry into revamping the compensation board after Ombudsman
Andre Marin discovered last March that it treated the province's crime
victims like "rats in a maze."

"So we have to be very careful about accepting any claims by
government that these monies are dedicated to victims," said Kormos.

"There should be careful scrutiny of where these funds end up and most
people would want to see them dedicated to compensating victims and
providing victim-support services," he said.