Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search


Asset forfeiture: sacrificing justice

Asset forfeiture: sacrificing justice

The Government has finally introduced its long-anticipated asset forfeiture legislation to the House as the Criminal Proceeds and Instruments Bill.

The bill allows the crown to seize assets from suspected criminals on a civil ("balance of probabilities") standard of proof. But the crown does not have to link the assets to any specific criminal activity; all it has to prove is that the target has engaged in "serious criminal activity" within the last seven years.

No specific criminal offence needs to be proved, and the bill is explicitly intended to be applied not just to those convicted of a criminal offence, but for those suspected of one (but for whom the police don't have enough evidence to prove it), or even those acquited in court. Worse, the onus of proof on the accused is reversed;

"Those who want to dispute forfeiture will have to prove their wealth has not been funded by criminal activity. If they can prove the value of restrained assets exceeds the benefits they derived from crime, the forfeiture will be reduced accordingly. If they can't prove that, their entire estate may be confiscated."

This violates fundamental norms of justice, such as the presumption of innocence and the prohibition on double jeopardy. Instead, it's proof by suspicion and guilty until proven innocent - Ahmed Zaoui standards of evidence.

Goff claims that

"No person stands to lose assets or profits that they have rightfully owned or gained"

However, the civil standard and the reversed burden of proof virtually guarantee it. While Goff may see things like the presumption of innocence and the onus of proof being on the crown as impediments to putting criminals behind bars, they are there for a very good reason: to prevent injustice. By removing those safeguards, Goff opens the door to innocent people, incorrectly suspected of criminal activity, having their houses seized.

But perhaps the most odious aspect of the legislation is Goff's emphasis on money. According to his press release, the bill "will reap millions" from criminals. Reading down, the government expects to gain $14 million a year. And we're sacrificing justice for that?

See also:

Asset forfeiture: the dangers of settlements

Asset forfeiture: "a valuable means of revenue collection"

Asset forfeiture: disappearing concerns

Ahmed Zaoui Standards of Evidence


© Scoop Media

Top Scoops Headlines


27-29 Sept: Social Enterprise World Forum Live Blog

1600+ delegates from more than 45 countries have came together to share wisdom, build networks and discuss how to create a more sustainable future using social enterprise as a vehicle. Attending the Forum were social enterprise practitioners, social entrepreneurs, policy makers, community leaders, investors, activists, academics and more from across the globe... More>>

HiveMind Report: A Universal Basic Income For Aotearoa NZ

Results from this HiveMind suggests that an overwhelming majority of Kiwis believe that due to changing circumstances and inefficiencies in the current system, we need a better system to take care of welfare of struggling members in our society. More>>


Scoop Hivemind: Medical Cannabis - Co-Creating A Policy For Aotearoa

Welcome to the fourth and final HiveMind for Scoop’s Opening the Election campaign for 2017. This HiveMind explores the question: what would a fair, humane and safe Medical Cannabis policy look like for Aotearoa, NZ in 2018? More>>


Lyndon Hood: Notes On National’s Election Campaign, In Poem Form

Nationyl’s bitumen-ing / As they du du / Seed groweth / River floweth / Then ‘dozer drives thru / Highway ensu. More>>