HTTP/1.0 200 OK Content-Type: text/html
Pubdate: Fri, 18 Mar 2005 Source: Peace Arch News (CN BC) Copyright: 2005 Peace Arch News Contact: http://www.peacearchnews.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1333 Author: Kevin Diakiw Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/af.htm (Asset Forfeiture) PROVE IT OR LOSE IT CIVIL FORFEITURE ENACTED BY FALL - COLEMAN People charged with crimes may lose their property if they can't prove it was bought with legally gained money. Legislation introduced in Victoria last week will eventually allow government to seize goods believed to have been bought with ill-gotten profit. The proposed legislation is causing concern on the part of B.C. Civil Liberties Association. Known as "civil forfeiture," the legislation could be enacted by fall and goods could be seized soon thereafter, B.C. Solicitor General Rich Coleman said. BCCLA's Micheal Vonn said the legislation is flawed and tramples some basic rights. "We have deep concerns," Vonn said. "On a number of grounds, not only the civil liberties grounds and the due process grounds, but also in federalism grounds." She said because the federal government has similar legislation under the proceeds of crime, the latter would take precedence over provincial law. "What this is is duplicate criminal process." However, similar legislation is already in effect in Ontario, Manitoba and is in the works in Alberta. "Our legislation does put a bit more reverse onus (guilty until proven otherwise) on people versus the other two or three provinces that have done it. That's because I wanted to push the window a little bit," Coleman said. "That's why it will take me a little longer to get it done, but at least I'll have something that works." Coleman points out the government will require just cause to seize property. The implications for people who run marijuana grow operations are far-reaching. "If you own this home, and you own this grow op, prove to us you've bought this home with legal money," Coleman said. Vonn said similar legislation exists in the U.S. and it's "certainly ripe for abuse" if enacted here. - --- MAP posted-by: Derek