UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Confiscating the proceeds of crime : the amendments to Canada's Criminal Code, their force and effect German, Peter Maurice 1990

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1990_A6_4 G47.pdf [ 7.86MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0077719.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0077719-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0077719-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0077719-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0077719-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0077719-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0077719-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0077719-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0077719.ris

Full Text

CONFISCATING THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME: THE AMENDMENTS CANADA'S CRIMINAL CODE. THEIR FORCE AND EFFECT by Peter Maurice German B.A. (Hons.), Mount A l l i s o n U n i v e r s i t y , 1973 LL.B., U n i v e r s i t y of New Brunswick, 1981 M.A., Simon F r a s e r U n i v e r s i t y , 1990 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF LAWS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES ( F a c u l t y of Law) We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming t o the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA November 1990 © Peter Maurice German, 1990 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of GRADUATE STUDIES (LAW) The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada rw Q 25 SEPTEMBER 1990 DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT T h i s t h e s i s examines the amendments t o Canada's C r i m i n a l Code which t a r g e t the proceeds of crime by, i n t e r a l i a , c r i m i n a l i z i n g money l a u n d e r i n g and e n a b l i n g the c o n f i s c a t i o n of a s s e t s . The amendments r e p r e s e n t the c e n t r a l t h r u s t of Canada's c o n t r i b u t i o n i n a g l o b a l e f f o r t t o stem the t r a f f i c i n i l l i c i t drugs, Canada b e l a t e d l y f o l l o w i n g the l e a d of the U n i t e d S t a t e s , Great B r i t a i n and A u s t r a l i a . In the t h e s i s , I argue t h a t the amendments go much f u r t h e r than e a r l i e r crime c o n t r o l i n i t i a t i v e s and r e p r e s e n t a p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t from the t r a d i t i o n a l , s i n g l e t r a n s a c t i o n , i n d i v i d u a l - o r i e n t e d s t r u c t u r e of c r i m i n a l law t o one which i s both p r o p e r t y - d r i v e n and premised upon m u l t i p l e - t r a n s a c t i o n s p e r p e t r a t e d by c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The amendments focus on the proceeds of crime, as opposed t o the o f f e n d e r , i n d i v i d u a l or c o r p o r a t e , t h e i r avowed purpose being t o n e u t r a l i z e c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s r a t h e r than p u n i s h o f f e n d e r s . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the amendments i s i n e x o r a b l y t i e d t o the speed by which c r i m i n a l proceeds can be s e i z e d or r e s t r a i n e d and thus they operate p r o s p e c t i v e l y , i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of a l a t e r c o n v i c t i o n . In order t o accomplish t h e i r o b j e c t i v e s , the amendments draw upon concepts p r e v i o u s l y the p r e s e r v e of the p r i v a t e law of c o n t r a c t and t o r t , i n t r o d u c i n g some which are f o r e i g n t o the c l a s s i c norms and t r a d i t i o n s of c r i m i n a l law and s e n t e n c i n g , both s u b s t a n t i v e and p r o c e d u r a l . The t h e s i s examines the amendments from both a t e x t u a l and a C h a r t e r p e r s p e c t i v e . In so doing, c o n s i d e r a b l e emphasis i s accorded the presumption of innocence, a s t r o n g l e g i t i m a t i n g f o r c e i n c r i m i n a l law. I n t e g r a l t o the presumption i s the Crown's burden o f p r o o f - beyond a reasonable doubt. The l e g i s l a t i o n ' s adoption of the c i v i l balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t i s , t h e r e f o r e , c o n s i d e r e d i t s weakest l i n k . Other aspects of the l e g i s l a t i o n g i v e r i s e t o i n t e r p r e t i v e and Charter c h a l l e n g e s . The t h e s i s a l s o d i s c u s s e s the need f o r t r a c i n g mechanisms, mandatory f i n a n c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n r e p o r t i n g , the development of a s t r i k e f o r c e approach t o implementation and a s h a r i n g of proceeds by law enforcement agencies. Further, the t h e s i s d e c r i e s any use of the l e g i s l a t i o n as a t o o l f o r p l e a b a r g a i n i n g or t o t a r g e t p e t t y c r i m i n a l s . i i i TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT i i TABLE OF CONTENTS i v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS v i CHAPTER 1 - CONFISCATING THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME - AN OVERVIEW.. 1 C r i m i n a l Law and C o n f i s c a t i o n a t Common Law 7 Canadian S t a t u t o r y and J u d i c i a l I n i t i a t i v e s Pre-1989 .... 11 The I n t e r n a t i o n a l L e g i s l a t i v e Scheme 22 The U n i t e d S t a t e s 2 6 B r i t a i n 30 A u s t r a l i a 31 The C l a s s i c Norms and T r a d i t i o n s of Canadian C r i m i n a l Law 32 CHAPTER 2 - THE AMENDMENTS AND THE CODE 42 E n t e r p r i s e Crime and Designated Drug Offences 43 Laundering Proceeds of Crime 47 Proceeds of Crime 53 Search, S e i z u r e and R e s t r a i n t 55 In Personam C o n f i s c a t i o n 64 In Rem C o n f i s c a t i o n 71 The Net Worth Inference 75 The P r o t e c t i o n of Persons A f f e c t e d by the L e g i s l a t i o n ... 78 Summary 84 CHAPTER 3 - THE AMENDMENTS AND THE CHARTER 85 S p e c i a l Search Warrants, R e s t r a i n t Orders and S e c t i o n 8 . 87 C o n f i s c a t i o n and the Presumption of Innocence - S e c t i o n 11(d) 98 Fundamental J u s t i c e - S e c t i o n 7 106 The F i n a l Hurdle - S e c t i o n 1 110 Summary 115 CHAPTER 4 - CRIMINAL CONFISCATION IN CANADA - ITS FUTURE 117 T r a c i n g the Proceeds of Crime 12 0 Mandatory F i n a n c i a l Reporting Requirements 12 3 The S t r i k e Force 131 A s s e t S h a r i n g 135 The Amendments - Can They Weather the Storm 138 P l e a B a r g a i n i n g and E x t r a - J u d i c i a l Arrangements 139 A v o i d i n g the 'Big F i s h ' 141 Summary 143 i v BIBLIOGRAPHY ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS During the r e s e a r c h and w r i t i n g of t h i s t h e s i s , I r e c e i v e d v a l u a b l e a s s i s t a n c e from many persons. I w i l l not attempt an e x h a u s t i v e l i s t , however do extend my thanks t o a l l , adding the caveat t h a t the o p i n i o n s expressed and the i m p e r f e c t i o n s c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the t h e s i s are mine alone. W i t h i n the F a c u l t y of Law a t the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, thanks are due P r o f e s s o r M a r i l y n MacCrimmon, who heads the Graduate Program, Dr. DeLloyd Guth, Dean George C u r t i s and my f e l l o w graduate students f o r t h e i r comments and c r i t i c i s m s . My thanks a l s o t o the F a c u l t y f o r employing me as a L e g a l W r i t i n g I n s t r u c t o r and a Research A s s i s t a n t , i n p a r t i c u l a r t o A s s o c i a t e Dean L i z Edinger, P r o f e s s o r s I s a b e l Grant, Lynn Smith and Jerome A t r e n s . P r o f e s s o r Atrens a l s o k i n d l y a c t ed as the second reader of t h i s t h e s i s . S p e c i a l notes of a p p r e c i a t i o n are due t o the s t a f f of the Law L i b r a r y and t o those members of the R.C.M.P. i n v o l v e d i n c r i m i n a l c o n f i s c a t i o n i n v e s t i g a t i o n s who made h e l p f u l s u g g e s t i o n s and posed i n t e r e s t i n g problems. L a s t , but most important, I owe a debt of g r a t i t u d e t o my t h e s i s a d v i s o r , Dr. John Hogarth, who always found time t o p r o v i d e a d v i c e and support d e s p i t e an onerous schedule. I thank him s i n c e r e l y . v i CHAPTER ONE CONFISCATING THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME - AN OVERVIEW On January 1, 1989, Canada added i t s name t o a growing l i s t of c o u n t r i e s i n t e n t on stemming the t i d e of i l l e g a l drug t r a f f i c k i n g 1 through the use of s t a t u t o r y c o n f i s c a t i o n 2 schemes. On t h a t day, B i l l C-61, r e f e r r e d t o as the proceeds of crime amendments, 3 came i n t o f o r c e . 4 I t amended v a r i o u s f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s , most n o t a b l y the 1 The scope and extent of i l l i c i t drug t r a f f i c k i n g i n Canada i s d i s c u s s e d l a t e r i n t h i s t h e s i s . A p e r s u a s i v e and contemporary j o u r n a l i s t i c overview of the problem can be found however, i n V i c t o r Malarek, Merchants of M i s e r y (Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1989). 2 T h i s t h e s i s u t i l i z e s a d i s t i n c t i o n between c o n f i s c a t i o n and f o r f e i t u r e developed by the Hodgson Committee i n England, a committee of s c h o l a r s funded by the Howard League f o r Penal Reform. I t uses the term ' c o n f i s c a t i o n 1 t o denote "the d e p r i v a t i o n of an o f f e n d e r of the proceeds or the p r o f i t s of crime" and ' f o r f e i t u r e 1 t o d e s c r i b e "the power of the Court t o take p r o p e r t y t h a t i s immediately connected w i t h an o f f e n c e " ( S i r Derek Hodgson, P r o f i t s of Crime and  T h e i r Recovery (London: Heinemann E d u c a t i o n a l Books, 1984) a t 5) . Others have i m p l i c i t l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d between f o r f e i t u r e and c o n f i s c a t i o n through use of the l a t t e r term (see, e.g., Bruce A. MacFarlane, " C o n f i s c a t i n g the F r u i t s of Crime" (1984-85) 27 Crim. L. 0. 408 and H.R.S. Ryan, "Annotation" (1985) 46 C R . (3d) 278). 3 In t h i s t h e s i s , the amendments i n t r o d u c e d by B i l l C-61 are v a r i o u s l y r e f e r r e d t o as 'the amendments, 1 'the proceeds of crime amendments,' 'the l e g i s l a t i o n * and 'the proceeds of crime l e g i s l a t i o n . 1 4 The l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y surrounding t h i s i n i t i a t i v e spans f i v e y e a r s . B i l l C-19, the C r i m i n a l Law Reform A c t . 1984. i n t r o d u c e d on 7 Feb. 1984, e n v i s i o n e d wide-ranging powers of search, s e i z u r e and f r e e z i n g of the proceeds of c r i m i n a l o f f e n c e s (s. 107) as w e l l as t h e i r c o n f i s c a t i o n (s. 206) . The l e g i s l a t i o n met c o n s i d e r a b l e o b j e c t i o n o u t s i d e 1 C r i m i n a l Code, the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t 5 and the Food and Drugs  A c t . 6 p r o v i d i n g the organs of law enforcement w i t h sweeping new i n v e s t i g a t i v e t o o l s which t a r g e t the proceeds of c r i m e 7 and by g i v i n g c r i m i n a l c o u r t s the power t o order c o n f i s c a t i o n of these p r o c e e d s . 8 The amendments permit, i n t e r a l i a , the p r e - t r i a l s e i z u r e and r e s t r a i n t of p r o p e r t y d e r i v e d from e n t e r p r i s e c r i m e , 9 a genus of P a r l i a m e n t and d i e d with the p r o r o g a t i o n of P a r l i a m e n t (see g e n e r a l l y R i c h a r d G. Mosley, " S e i z i n g the Proceeds of Crime: The O r i g i n s and Main Features of Canada's C r i m i n a l F o r f e i t u r e L e g i s l a t i o n , " unpub. paper p r e s e n t e d t o the N a t i o n a l Conference on Proceeds of Crime ( h e r e a f t e r NCPC), Ottawa, 29-31 Mar. 1989 a t 13). A m o d i f i e d v e r s i o n , i n t r o d u c e d on 19 Dec. 1984 as s. 75 of B i l l C-18, the C r i m i n a l Law Amendment Act, 1985, d i d not r e a c h t h i r d r e a d i n g . B i l l C-61 r e c e i v e d f i r s t r e a d i n g on 29 May 1987, second r e a d i n g on 14 Sept. 1987, t h i r d r e a d i n g on 7 J u l y 1988 and Royal Assent on 13 Sept. 1988. Proclamation took p l a c e on 31 Oct. 1988 and the amendments came i n t o f o r c e on 1 Jan. 1989 as c. 51 of S.C. 1988. I n c l u s i o n as P a r t X I I . 2 ( s s . 462.3 t o 462.5) of the C r i m i n a l Code. R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 ( h e r e a f t e r o c c a s i o n a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as the Code), o c c u r r e d by way of R.S.C. 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 42. 5 R.S.C. 1985, c. N - l , as amended. 6 R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, as amended. 7 The d e f i n i t i o n f o r 'proceeds of crime' i s broad, i n c l u d i n g a l l " p r o p erty, b e n e f i t or advantage, w i t h i n or o u t s i d e Canada, ob t a i n e d d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y as a r e s u l t o f " an e n t e r p r i s e crime or a designated drug o f f e n c e ( C r i m i n a l  Code, s. 462.3). 8 In t h i s t h e s i s , the term 'proceeds of c r i m e 1 i s used i n p r e f e r e n c e t o ' p r o f i t s of c r i m e 1 as i t i s arguably broader i n scope and i n c l o s e r alignment w i t h the i n t e n t of the amendments. 9 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.3. 2 l i b e r a l d e f i n i t i o n , and from designated drug o f f e n c e s , 1 0 by means of s p e c i a l s e a r c h warrants 1 1 and r e s t r a i n t o r d e r s . 1 2 When sought by the Crown, c o n f i s c a t i o n r e s u l t s a f t e r c o n v i c t i o n f o r o f f e n c e s committed i n r e l a t i o n t o p r o p e r t y which i s the proceeds of c r i m e 1 3 or, i f a l i n k i s not e s t a b l i s h e d t o the o f f e n c e , made o p t i o n a l i f the p r o p e r t y i s the proceeds of other c r i m i n a l a c t i v i t y . 1 4 I f , a f t e r c o n v i c t i o n , i n s p e c i e conveyance t o the Crown i s not p o s s i b l e , a f i n e of e q u i v a l e n t worth, wi t h mandatory imprisonment i n d e f a u l t , i s s u b s t i t u t e d . 1 5 The new o f f e n c e of 'laundering proceeds o f crime' i s c r e a t e d , 1 6 as i s p o s s e s s i o n of the proceeds of drug o f f e n c e s . 1 7  In rem c o n f i s c a t i o n may occur where a person d i e s o r absconds. 1 8 The balance o f p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t i s imported t o e s t a b l i s h the t a i n t on p r o p e r t y 1 9 and a s t a t u t o r y i n f e r e n c e i s c r e a t e d t o a s s i s t 1 0 I b i d . 1 1 I b i d . , s. 462 . 32 . 1 2 I b i d . , s. 462.33. 1 3 I b i d . , s. 462.37(1) . 1 4 I b i d . , s. 462.37(2) . 1 5 I b i d . . s s . 462.37 (3) and 462.37(4). 1 6 I b i d . . s. 462.31. S i m i l a r p r o v i s i o n s a re i n c l u d e d i n the Food and Drugs A c t as s s . 44.3 and 50.3 and i n the N a r c o t i c  C o n t r o l A c t as s. 19.2. 1 7 Food and Drugs Act, s s . 44.2 and 50.2 and N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l  A c t , s. 19.1. 1 8 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.38(2). 1 9 I b i d . , s. 462.37 (1) . 3 w i t h the d e t e r m i n a t i o n of net worth. 2 0 The v e i l of s e c r e c y which shrouds income t a x re c o r d s i s drawn back t o a l l o w c e r t a i n p o l i c e e n q u i r i e s 2 1 and a s t a t u t o r y defence t o c i v i l and c r i m i n a l l i a b i l i t y o b t a i n s f o r persons who d i s c l o s e i n f o r m a t i o n r e l a t e d t o the proceeds o f c r i m e . 2 2 The i m p l i c a t i o n s of the amendments are tremendous. 2 3 T h i s t h e s i s argues t h a t the amendments go much f u r t h e r than e a r l i e r crime c o n t r o l i n i t i a t i v e s and r e p r e s e n t a pa r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t from the t r a d i t i o n a l s i n g l e t r a n s a c t i o n , i n d i v i d u a l -o r i e n t e d 2 4 s t r u c t u r e of c r i m i n a l law wit h which Canadians are f a m i l i a r t o one which i s both p r o p e r t y - d r i v e n and premised upon m u l t i p l e - t r a n s a c t i o n s p e r p e t r a t e d by c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . They fo c u s upon the proceeds of crime, as opposed t o the o f f e n d e r , i n d i v i d u a l or c o r p o r a t e ; 2 5 t h e i r avowed purpose being t o n e u t r a l i z e 2 0 I b i d . , s. 462.39. 2 1 I b i d . , s. 462.48. 2 2 I b i d . , s. 462.47. 2 3 A prominent Vancouver lawyer d e s c r i b e s the amendments as "preposterous ' o v e r k i l l . ' " Kenneth Young adds t h a t they "most r a d i c a l l y a f f e c t ( i f not t o say, undermine and/or u t t e r l y ignore) the r i g h t s of c i t i z e n s , g e n e r a l l y , and t h e i r c o u n s e l , p a r t i c u l a r l y " ("Memorandum Re: B i l l C-61." unpub. paper d e l i v e r e d t o the C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e S e c t i o n , B.C. Branch, C.B.A., Vancouver, 18 Jan. 1989 a t 1). 2 4 The words " s i n g l e t r a n s a c t i o n s committed by i n d i v i d u a l o f f e n d e r s " a re used by P a t r i c i a Donald, i n "A Commentary on the P r o v i s i o n s of C-61 Canada's New Proceeds of Crime L e g i s l a t i o n (S.C. 1988, c. 51)," (1989) 47 The Advocate 423. 2 5 The c r i m i n a l c u l p a b i l i t y of c o r p o r a t i o n s i s the s u b j e c t of a l a r g e body of l e g a l l i t e r a t u r e . Although the proceeds of crime l e g i s l a t i o n may cause s e r i o u s jeopardy t o the w e l l - b e i n g of c o r p o r a t i o n s through the s e i z u r e or f r e e z i n g o f a s s e t s , i t 4 c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s r a t h e r t h a n p u n i s h i n d i v i d u a l o f f e n d e r s . T h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f t h e amendments i s i n e x o r a b l y t i e d t o t h e s p e e d b y w h i c h c r i m i n a l p r o c e e d s c a n be s e i z e d o r f r o z e n a n d a s a r e s u l t , t h e y o p e r a t e p r o s p e c t i v e l y , i n a n t i c i p a t i o n o f a c o n v i c t i o n i n l a t e r p r o c e e d i n g s . I n o r d e r t o a c c o m p l i s h t h i s p u r p o s e , t h e amendments d r a w u p o n c o n c e p t s p r e v i o u s l y t h e p r e s e r v e o f t h e p r i v a t e l a w o f c o n t r a c t a n d t o r t , i n t r o d u c i n g some w h i c h a r e f o r e i g n t o t h e c l a s s i c norms a n d t r a d i t i o n s o f c r i m i n a l l a w a n d s e n t e n c i n g , b o t h s u b s t a n t i v e a n d p r o c e d u r a l . T h e f u n d a m e n t a l n a t u r e o f t h i s s h i f t p r e c l u d e s t h e u s e o f t r a d i t i o n a l t h e o r i e s a n d m o d e l s when a s s e s s i n g i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s . A c c o r d i n g l y , t h o s e a s p e c t s w h i c h a r e f o r e i g n t o t h e p r e - e x i s t i n g s t a t e o f C a n a d i a n c r i m i n a l l a w a r e o v e r v i e w e d i n t h e p a g e s w h i c h f o l l o w , u t i l i z i n g a c c e p t e d norms a n d t r a d i t i o n s a s a c o u n t e r p o i n t . E x p l o r i n g a new s t a t u t o r y i n i t i a t i v e , d e s p i t e i t s a n c i e n t p r e c u r s o r s , i s f r a u g h t w i t h d a n g e r . C a n a d i a n c o u r t s a r e o n l y now s t a r t i n g t o d e a l w i t h c a s e s i n i t i a t e d u n d e r t h e l e g i s l a t i o n a n d i t w i l l b e some t i m e b e f o r e p r o n o u n c e m e n t s a r e r e c e i v e d f r o m s e n i o r a p p e l l a t e l e v e l s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e t o p i c i s o f s u c h g r e a t i m p o r t a n c e t o p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n t h e l e g a l c o m m u n i t y , 2 6 l a w n e i t h e r f o c u s e s u p o n n o r c h a n g e s a c c e p t e d n o t i o n s o f c o r p o r a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r c r i m i n a l a c t s . 2 6 T h e U n i t e d S t a t e s e x p e r i e n c e d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n c a n be f i n a n c i a l l y d e s t r u c t i v e t o b o t h i n d i v i d u a l s a n d c o r p o r a t i o n s , c r e a t i n g a s i g n i f i c a n t l i a b i l i t y f o r c o u n s e l who a r e o b l i v i o u s t o i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s . R e c o g n i z i n g t h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f t h e a m e n d m e n t s , t h e Law S o c i e t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a r e c e n t l y s e n t a n a d v i s o r y t o a l l i t s m e m b e r s , s u m m a r i z i n g them a n d w a r n i n g o f t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s ("New P r o c e e d s o f C r i m e L e g i s l a t i o n " [1989] 10 5 enforcement p e r s o n n e l , the j u d i c i a r y and, not the l e a s t , the l a y p o p u l a t i o n , 2 7 t h a t e f f o r t s t o c o n t e x t u a l i z e the amendments are h o p e f u l l y worth the r e l a t e d r i s k s . T h i s Chapter begins with an overview of the h i s t o r y of f o r f e i t u r e i n E n g l i s h common law and Canadian c r i m i n a l law, a d m i t t e d l y s k i r t i n g many c e n t u r i e s i n a few s h o r t l i n e s . Increased emphasis i s accorded pre-1989 s t a t u t o r y and j u d i c i a l attempts t o Benchers' B u l l e t i n 2 ) . The c r i m i n a l defence bar, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n B r i t i s h Columbia and O n t a r i o , continue t o express v o c i f e r o u s o b j e c t i o n t o the amendments. U n f o r t u n a t e l y the f e a r of t a i n t t o lawyers' r e t a i n e r s and t r u s t accounts, however important i t may be, dominates forums d e a l i n g w i t h the amendments, t o the e x c l u s i o n of a wider s c r u t i n y . I t a l s o p r e v e n t s a c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the e t h i c a l problems posed by lawyers who operate i n the shadowy world of money-changing. David J . F r i e d r e c e n t l y expressed a s i m i l a r concern f o r the d e r i s i v e e f f e c t of f o c u s s i n g on lawyer's f e e s when c o n s i d e r i n g the expanded use of American c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n ( " R a t i o n a l i z i n g C r i m i n a l F o r f e i t u r e , " (1988) J .  Crim. L. & Crim. 328 a t 330) . On the 'plus' s i d e f o r the c r i m i n a l defence bar, a Winnipeg lawyer r e c e n t l y termed the amendments "a lawyer's dream" because " [ c ] i t i z e n s are going t o have t o h i r e lawyers t o e x p l a i n B i l l C-61 t o them, t o defend them a g a i n s t i t and t o c h a l l e n g e i t on t h e i r b e h a l f " ( " B i l l C-61: P r o p o s a l t o s e i z e crime proceeds c a l l e d lawyer's dream," The N a t i o n a l . n.d.). Furthermore, drug defence lawyers i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s are overcoming the problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t a i n t e d t r u s t accounts by o b t a i n i n g r e t a i n e r s from o t h e r than an accused (Steven Waldman and Mark M i l l e r , "The Drug Lawyers," Newsweek. 13 Nov. 1989 a t 41-2) and by the f e d e r a l J u s t i c e Department's r e s t r i c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of l a u n d e r i n g l e g i s l a t i o n , when c o n s i d e r i n g cases i n v o l v i n g lawyers. 2 7 Kenneth Young captured the o p i n i o n of many members of the c r i m i n a l defence bar when he commented: " P o t e n t i a l l y (and the p o t e n t i a l of the l e g i s l a t i o n f o r abuse i s immense), i t s implementation i s capable of e l e v a t i n g any c i t i z e n i n p o s s e s s i o n of v i r t u a l l y any a s s e t t o the ranks of o r g a n i z e d crime; and r e d u c i n g any lawyer r e t a i n e d t o r e p r e s e n t him t o those of h i s p a r t n e r or accomplice (Young, supra. n t . 23; see a l s o L a r r y S t i l l , "Drug p r o f i t s t a r g e t of new law," The  Vancouver Sun. 9 Nov. 1989 a t A13) . 6 c o n f i s c a t e t h e p r o c e e d s o f c r i m e i n C a n a d a . T h e amendments a r e t h e n p l a c e d i n t h e b r o a d e r s c o p e o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l c r i m e c o n t r o l i n i t i a t i v e s , n o t i n g t h e o b l i g a t i o n s p l a c e d u p o n C a n a d a b y v a r i o u s p r o t o c o l s , f o l l o w e d by a n o v e r v i e w o f c e r t a i n l o n g - s t a n d i n g p r i n c i p l e s o f A n g l o - A m e r i c a n c r i m i n a l l a w ; i n c l u d i n g t h e d i s t i n c t i o n b e t w e e n c r i m i n a l a n d c i v i l p r o c e e d i n g s , t h e p u r p o s e o f c r i m i n a l l a w a n d c e r t a i n f u n d a m e n t a l n o r m s a n d t r a d i t i o n s , p r o c e d u r a l a n d s u b s t a n t i v e . I n t h e c h a p t e r s w h i c h f o l l o w , t h e amendments a r e r e v i e w e d i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l , w i t h e m p h a s i s b e i n g p l a c e d o n t h o s e a s p e c t s w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t o r c a l l i n t o q u e s t i o n c e r t a i n o f t h e n o r m s a n d t r a d i t i o n s r e v i e w e d i n t h i s C h a p t e r a n d w h i c h i m p a c t o n t h e t h e s i s s t a t e m e n t . T h e a l l - i m p o r t a n t p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e C a n a d i a n C h a r t e r o f  R i g h t s a n d F r e e d o m s 2 8 p l a y a n i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n t h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n . I n c o n c l u s i o n , comment i s made o f t h e v a r i o u s d e f i c i e n c i e s n o t e d i n t h e a m e n d m e n t s , e r r o r s o f b o t h o m i s s i o n a n d i n c l u s i o n . CRIMINAL LAW AND CONFISCATION AT COMMON LAW F o r f e i t u r e o f p r o p e r t y by t h e s t a t e i s n o t a n o v e l c o n c e p t . I t s h i s t o r y , w h i c h l e g a l h i s t o r i a n s t r a c e t o e a r l y b i b l i c a l t i m e s , 2 9 i s i n e x t r i c a b l y t i e d t o t h a t o f b o t h c r i m i n a l l a w a n d t h e 2 8 P a r t I o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t . 1 9 8 2 . S c h . B t o t h e C a n a d a A c t . 1982 ( U . K . ) , c . 11 ( h e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o a s t h e C h a r t e r ) . 2 9 H o d g s o n , s u p r a . n t . 2 a t 1 4 . 7 l a w o f n e g l i g e n c e , o f w h i c h i t was a p r e c u r s o r . T h r o u g h t h e y e a r s i t s e r v e d many f u n c t i o n s a n d t o o k many f o r m s . I n f e u d a l E n g l a n d t h e p r i n c i p l e o f a t t a i n d e r s e r v e d t o e x t i n g u i s h a p e r s o n ' s " c i v i l r i g h t s a n d c a p a c i t i e s " 3 0 u p o n c o n v i c t i o n f o r a f e l o n y r e s u l t i n g i n a s e n t e n c e o f d e a t h . T h i s i n c l u d e d t h e a u t o m a t i c f o r f e i t u r e o f a f e l o n ' s r e a l a n d p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y . 3 1 T h e s o u r c e o f t h e p r o p e r t y d i d n o t m a t t e r , n o r d i d t h e f a c t t h a t i t , more o f t e n t h a n n o t , was c o m p l e t e l y i n c i d e n t a l a n d u n c o n n e c t e d t o t h e o f f e n c e . 3 2 T h e d i s i n h e r i t a n c e o f a f e l o n ' s f a m i l y , o r ' c o r r u p t i o n o f b l o o d , | 3 3 w h i c h f o l l o w e d , t h e p o t e n t i a l l o s s t o c r e d i t o r s o f t h e f e l o n a n d t h e i n a b i l i t y o f a v i c t i m t o o b t a i n s a t i s f a c t i o n o f a c i v i l j u d g m e n t w e r e u n f o r t u n a t e r e s u l t s o f t h e s y s t e m . 3 4 E v e n t u a l l y , t h e h a r s h n e s s o f f o r f e i t u r e r e s u l t e d i n i t s a b o l i t i o n i n E n g l a n d . 3 5 A p e c u l i a r y e t p a r a l l e l t y p e o f f o r f e i t u r e f o u n d e x p r e s s i o n i n 3 0 H e n r y C . B l a c k , B l a c k ' s Law D i c t i o n a r y , r e v . 4 t h e d . ( S t . P a u l : W e s t , 1968) a t 1 6 2 . 3 1 H o d g s o n , s u p r a . n t . 2 a t 1 2 . D a v i d F r i e d n o t e s t h a t " ' f o r f e i t u r e o f e s t a t e , ' a f o r m o f c r i m i n a l f o r f e i t u r e , was a m a n d a t o r y i n c i d e n t o f a l l common l a w a n d m o s t s t a t u t o r y f e l o n y c o n v i c t i o n s . F o r f e i t u r e o f e s t a t e was t h e t a k i n g b y t h e C r o w n o f a l l o f t h e f e l o n ' s r e a l a n d p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y " ( s u p r a , n t . 26 a t 3 2 9 n ) . 3 2 S u p r a . n t . 24 a t 4 2 3 . 3 3 A l e g a l f i c t i o n w h i c h v i e w e d t h e f e l o n ' s b l o o d a s c o r r u p t . A s a r e s u l t , d e s c e n d e n t s o f s u c h p e r s o n s l o s t t h e i r a b i l i t y t o i n h e r i t t h r o u g h t h e f e l o n . 3 4 H o d g s o n , s u p r a , n t . 2 a t 12 a n d 1 5 . 3 5 F o r f e i t u r e A c t , 33 & 34 V i c t . , c . 2 3 . 8 English c i v i l law. Known as the deodand, i t c a l l e d for the f o r f e i t u r e to the Crown, and l a t e r to a victim or h i s family, of "any object which caused a person's death," 3 7 whether or not i t s use was i n t e n t i o n a l . 3 8 An a r t i f i c e , necessitated by the void existant where negligence law now stands, i t focused attention upon an object, i n rem, as opposed to the person who wielded, co n t r o l l e d or was responsible for i t s use. In t h i s manner, a weapon, a cart or an animal could become the object of the law's attention. By the early part of the nineteenth century, the deodand had evolved into an a r b i t r a r y pecuniary equivalent of the cost of an offending object. 3 9 Generally i t f a i l e d to adequately compensate the v i c t i m as j u r i e s 4 0 normally assessed only that part of an object, such as the wheel of a cart, which came into contact with the deceased. 4 1 Nevertheless, i t represented a t h i n l y guised form of t o r t i o u s recovery. The advent of the r a i l r o a d spurred forward the development of negligence law and doomed the deodand. I t became an anachronism, f i n a l l y abolished i n 184642 and lar g e l y 3 6 See Jacob J . Finkelstein, "The Goring Ox: Some H i s t o r i c a l Perspectives on the Deodands, Forfeitures, Wrongful Death and the Western Notion of Sovereignty," (1973) 46 - Temple L.Q. 169 for a comprehensive h i s t o r i c a l review of deodand. 3 7 Hodgson, supra. nt. 2 at 14. 3 8 Mosley, supra. nt. 4 at 2. 3 9 Hodgson, supra. nt. 2 at 14. 4 0 Usually a grand jury or a coroner's jury. 4 1 Ibid. 4 2 Deodands Ab o l i t i o n Act. 9 & 10 V i c t . , c. 62. 9 r e p l a c e d by a s t a t u t e designed t o compensate the f a m i l i e s of f a t a l i t y v i c t i m s . 4 3 D e s p i t e the d e c l i n e of common law f o r f e i t u r e and the deodand, v a r i o u s s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s which p e r m i t t e d the f o r f e i t u r e of c e r t a i n c h a t t e l s t o the Crown remained. To t h i s day, these c h a t t e l s can be d i v i d e d i n t o two broad c a t e g o r i e s , those used t o commit an o f f e n c e 4 4 and those which are per se i l l e g a l . 4 5 The former i n c l u d e s such items as a gun or k n i f e used i n the commission of an a s s a u l t ; the l a t t e r i n c l u d e s c o u n t e r f e i t money, p r o h i b i t e d f i r e a r m s and i l l e g a l drugs. C l e a r l y , f o r f e i t u r e h i s t o r i c a l l y d e s c r i b e d the e f f e c t of d i f f e r e n t l e g a l mechanisms i n E n g l i s h law. The escheat of a f e l o n ' s p o s s e s s i o n s served a very d i f f e r e n t purpose from the s e i z u r e of an implement which r e s u l t e d i n a person's death or the s e i z u r e o f evidence of a crime. The only common i n g r e d i e n t between f o r f e i t u r e a t common law, the deodand and s t a t u t o r y f o r f e i t u r e was a person's d i s p o s s e s s i o n of h i s or her p r o p e r t y , o r a p o r t i o n t h e r e o f . Furthermore, except i n a very t a n g e n t i a l sense, none i n v o l v e d c o n f i s c a t i o n of the proceeds of crime. 4 3 A c t f o r Compensating the F a m i l i e s of Persons K i l l e d By  A c c i d e n t s , 9 & 10 V i c t . , c. 93. 4 4 V a r i o u s l y r e f e r r e d t o as t o o l s or instruments of an o f f e n c e . 4 5 V a r i o u s l y r e f e r r e d t o as contraband, or the r e s or s u b j e c t matter of an o f f e n c e . 10 CANADIAN STATUTORY AND JUDICIAL INITITATIVES PRE-1989 The c r i m i n a l law of Canada a t the time of C o n f e d e r a t i o n was e s s e n t i a l l y t h a t of England. 4 6 Although the f o r f e i t u r e of a f e l o n ' s a s s e t s continued t h e r e a f t e r , the Procedure i n C r i m i n a l  Cases A c t of 1869 e x p r e s s l y p r o h i b i t e d deodand 4 7 and e l i m i n a t e d c o r r u p t i o n of blood or d i s i n h e r i t a n c e except f o r o f f e n c e s r e l a t e d t o t r e a s o n . 4 8 Canada's c o d i f i c a t i o n of c r i m i n a l law i n 1892 brought common law f o r f e i t u r e t o an end. I t s p e c i f i c a l l y p r o h i b i t e d "any a t t a i n d e r or c o r r u p t i o n of blood, or any f o r f e i t u r e or e s c h e a t . " 4 9 However, s t a t u t o r y f o r f e i t u r e remained. Although undoubtedly r e s u l t i n g i n pecuniary l o s s t o an o f f e n d e r , such p r o v i s i o n s are not so much a punishment 5 0 as they are e v i d e n t i a r y v e h i c l e s designed See g e n e r a l l y , Desmond H. Brown, The Genesis of the  Canadian C r i m i n a l Code of 1892 (Toronto: Univ. of Toronto P r e s s , 1989), ch's. 3 and 5. 4 7 An A c t r e s p e c t i n g Procedure i n C r i m i n a l Cases, and o t h e r  matters r e l a t i n g t o C r i m i n a l Law. S.C. 1869, c. 29, s. 54. T h i s A c t was one of a number passed d u r i n g the y e a r s 1867-69 i n an attempt t o b r i n g together the p r e - e x i s t i n g c r i m i n a l law of the c o l o n i e s . See g e n e r a l l y , Brown, supra, n t . 46, ch. 5 and A.W. Mewett, "The C r i m i n a l Law, 1867-1967" (1967) 45 Can. B. Rev. 726. 4 8 An A c t r e s p e c t i n g Procedure i n C r i m i n a l Cases and o t h e r  matters r e l a t i n g t o C r i m i n a l Law, s. 55 and s. 56. 4 9 An A c t r e s p e c t i n g the C r i m i n a l Law. S.C. 1892, c. 29, s. 965. 5 0 For a c o n t r a r y view, see Rand J.'s judgment i n I n d u s t r i a l  Acceptance Corp. v. The Queen [1953] 2 S.C.R. 273 a t 278, 107 C.C.C. 1 a t 6, wherein he s t a t e s , i n r e l a t i o n t o revenue laws, t h a t "absolute f o r f e i t u r e i s an i n s e p a r a b l e accompaniment of p u n i t i v e a c t i o n . " See a l s o MacFarlane, 11 e i t h e r t o a s s i s t with the proof of crime or t o d i s p o s s e s an o f f e n d e r of i l l i c i t items. F e d e r a l s t a t u t e s are r e p l e t e with examples. The C r i m i n a l Code permits both i n rem 5 1 and i n personam f o r f e i t u r e , 5 2 as do the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t 5 3 and the Food and  Drugs A c t . 5 4 A l s o , a g e n e r a l f o r f e i t u r e power i s found i n s. 490(9)(d) of the Code, a l l o w i n g f o r the r e l e a s e t o a person e n t i t l e d t o p o s s e s s i o n , or i n the absence of such person, f o r f e i t u r e t o the Crown of p r o p e r t y s e i z e d by a p o l i c e o f f i c e r pursuant t o a f e d e r a l s t a t u t e . The s t a t u t o r y f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s do l i t t l e , however, t o r e l i e v e an o f f e n d e r of the proceeds of crime. T a l e s abound of c r i m i n a l s who t r a n s f e r or d e p o s i t s t o l e n or f r a u d u l e n t l y o b t a i n e d funds i n l e g i t i m a t e businesses or f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . P r i o r t o January 1, 1989, the a b i l i t y of law enforcement o f f i c i a l s t o r e c o v e r any or a l l of such monies was extremely l i m i t e d . In order t o understand the dilemma which faced p o l i t i c i a n s , p r o s e c u t o r s and p o l i c e , an overview of pre-1989 attempts t o c o n f i s c a t e i s i n s t r u c t i v e . 5 5 " C o n f i s c a t i n g the F r u i t s of Crime" Crim. L. 0. (supra n t . 2 a t 408-09). 5 1 For example, s. 102(3) ( i l l e g a l p o s s e s s i o n of weapons), s. 164(4) (obscene p u b l i c a t i o n s ) and s. 395(2) ( p r e c i o u s metals) . 5 2 For example, s. 319(4) (hate propaganda), s. 394(2) ( p r e c i o u s metals) and s. 492(2) ( e x p l o s i v e s ) . 5 3 S e c t i o n 16. 5 4 S e c t i o n 27. 5 5 See g e n e r a l l y , David G. P r i c e , " P o l i c e S e i z u r e of Bank Accounts Under S e c t i o n 29, C r i m i n a l Law Amendment Act, 12 S e c t i o n 314 [now 354] of the 1892 Code made i t u n l a w f u l t o r e c e i v e or r e t a i n anything obtained by an i n d i c t a b l e o f f e n c e . The s e c t i o n remained i n i t s o r i g i n a l form u n t i l 1954 when the words " r e c e i v e s or r e t a i n s " were e l i m i n a t e d , l e a v i n g the nexus of the o f f e n c e t o read: "has anything i n h i s p o s s e s s i o n " knowing t h a t i t was o b t a i n e d by an i n d i c t a b l e o f f e n c e . 5 6 The s e c t i o n c l e a r l y a p p l i e d o n l y t o items which were a d i r e c t product of crime, g e n e r a l l y s t o l e n p r o p e r t y , but not the proceeds of such c r i m i n a l a c t i v i t y , f o r example, money obtained by f e n c i n g s t o l e n p r o p e r t y . In 1976, 5 7 Parliament enlarged the s e c t i o n t o read: "has i n h i s p o s s e s s i o n any p r o p e r t y or t h i n g or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y o r t h i n g . " 5 8 Hopes t h a t the 1976 amendment allowed the s e i z u r e of monies on d e p o s i t i n f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s 5 9 and elsewhere were dashed by a Quebec n a r c o t i c s case. In Royal Bank of  Canada v. Bourque. e t a l . , 6 0 the Quebec S u p e r i o r Court r e l u c t a n t l y upheld the Royal Bank's r e f u s a l t o honour a C r i m i n a l Code search warrant a u t h o r i z i n g s e i z u r e of bank r e c o r d s and monies on account which were the known proceeds of drug o f f e n c e s . The Court d i s t i n g u i s h e d between t a n g i b l e d e p o s i t s , such as money i n a bank 1975," (1976-77) 19 Crim. L. 0. 86. 5 6 R.S.C. 1953-54, s. 296. 5 7 S.C. 1974-75-76, c. 93, s. 29 5 8 By d e f i n i t i o n , p r o p e r t y i n c l u d e d r e a l and p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y as w e l l as instruments r e p r e s e n t i n g p r o p e r t y e n t i t l e m e n t s (s. 2). 5 9 See, f o r example, P r i c e (supra. n t. 55 a t 89). 6 0 [1984] 38 C R . (3d) 363. 13 v a u l t , and i n t a n g i b l e d e p o s i t s , such as monies i n an account, the l a t t e r i t c o n s i d e r e d a debt owed by the bank t o i t s customer and not e x i g i b l e . The Court of Appeal agreed, a l s o w i t h r e g r e t , n o t i n g t h a t a bank account i s a book e n t r y which cannot be s e i z e d or brought b e f o r e a j u s t i c e of the peace. 6 1 I t acknowledged t h a t the 1976 amendment t o s. 354 broadened t h a t o f f e n c e t o i n c l u d e p o s s e s s i o n of i n t a n g i b l e items, however, the f a i l u r e t o modernize the s e a r c h and s e i z u r e p r o v i s i o n s of the Code a t the same time e s s e n t i a l l y n e u t r a l i z e d i t s worth. 6 2 The Supreme Court of Canada r e f u s e d l e a v e t o a p p e a l . 6 3 The most s u c c e s s f u l c o n f i s c a t i o n e f f o r t s o c c u r r e d under the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l Act, l e g i s l a t i o n focused on t h a t area of c r i m i n a l a c t i v i t y which has witnessed the g r e a t e s t growth d u r i n g the p a s t two decades. Drug t r a f f i c k i n g p r o v i d e s one of the f a s t e s t and e a s i e s t , though i l l e g a l , means by which t o a c q u i r e s u b s t a n t i a l p r o f i t s . Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , t h e r e f o r e , the p o l i c e o f t e n s e i z e l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s of money i n the course of drug r a i d s . T r a d i t i o n a l l y , the avowed purpose and a u t h o r i t y f o r such s e i z u r e s was the money's e v i d e n t i a r y worth. The A c t i n c o r p o r a t e s a scheme f o r r e s t o r a t i o n of s e i z e d p r o p e r t y t o the person l a w f u l l y e n t i t l e d t o p o s s e s s i o n . 6 4 6 1 A t t o r n e y General of Quebec v. Royal Bank of Canada, e t  a l . (1985) 18 C.C.C. (3d) 98, 44 C R . (3d) 387. 6 2 I b i d , a t 101 C.C.C. , 390 C R . 6 3 (1985) 18 C.C.C (3d) 98. 6 4 S e c t i o n 15. S i m i l a r , though not i d e n t i c a l p r o v i s i o n s are found i n the Food and Drugs Act, s s . 43, 44 and 51. 14 R e s t o r a t i o n can occur when an item i s not r e q u i r e d f o r e v i d e n t i a r y purposes and the a p p l i c a n t s a t i s f i e s the c o u r t , on a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s , of h i s or her e n t i t l e m e n t . 6 5 In the absence or d e n i a l of an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r r e s t o r a t i o n , the p r o p e r t y i s d e l i v e r e d t o the M i n i s t e r 6 6 while i n the event of c o n v i c t i o n , 6 7 i t i s f o r f e i t e d t o the f e d e r a l Crown. 6 8 Bruce MacFarlane notes t h a t the p r e v a i l i n g view p r i o r t o 1981 was t h a t the proceeds of crime c o u l d not be c o n f i s c a t e d by t h i s means u n l e s s they represented-the a c t u a l payment f o r t h e substance which formed the s u b j e c t matter of the c h a r g e . 6 9 The c o u r t s s t r i c t l y c o n s t r u e d both the l e g i s l a t i o n g e n e r a l l y 7 0 and the 6 5 See g e n e r a l l y , Bruce A. MacFarlane, Drug O f f e n c e s i n  Canada (Aurora: Canada Law Book Inc., 1986), ch. 19, f o r an overview of r e s t o r a t i o n a p p l i c a t i o n s . 6 6 S e c t i o n 15(4). The M i n i s t e r becomes the c u s t o d i a n of the p r o p e r t y , thereby r e q u i r i n g the F e d e r a l Court t o d e c i d e q u e s t i o n s of t i t l e (Smith v. The Queen (1975) 27 C.C.C. (2d) 252 (F.C.T.D.), a f f d . by F.C.A. (unreported) on 8 Sept. 1976 (MacFarlane, supra, nt., 65 a t 473)). 6 7 Of any person charged, not n e c e s s a r i l y the a p p l i c a n t (MacFarlane, supra. nt. 65 a t 479). 6 8 S e c t i o n 16. MacFarlane p o i n t s t o an i n t e r e s t i n g d i s t i n c t i o n which the c o u r t s have drawn between the p u n i t i v e n a t u r e of such f o r f e i t u r e and i t s a v a i l a b i l i t y as a s e n t e n c i n g o p t i o n . Although p u n i t i v e (R. v. McGregor and  McGregor (1956) 116 C.C.C. 55 (Man. Q.B.), i t i s not c o n s i d e r e d an a l t e r n a t i v e t o or p a r t of the sentence meted out t o the accused but "a s p e c i a l remedy" (R. v. Smith (1978) 2 C R . (3d) S-35 a t S-36 ( N f l d . C A . ) ) . The B.CC.A. accepted t h i s p r o p o s i t i o n i n R. v. Pope (1980) 52 C.C.C. (2d) 538 (see a l s o MacFarlane, supra. nt. 65 a t 480-82). 69 MacFarlane, supra. nt. 65 a t 467 7 0 See Re H i c k s and The Queen (1977) 36 C.C.C. (2d) 91 a t 95 (Man. C.A.). 15 r e s t o r a t i o n p r o v i s i o n s s p e c i f i c a l l y . 7 1 In 1981, however, the Manitoba Court of Appeal r e c o n s i d e r e d t h i s approach i n a case argued by MacFarlane, Re Aimonetti and The Queen. 7 2 In A i m o n e t t i . both cannabis r e s i n and $24,000 were s e i z e d i n a n a r c o t i c s search. In r e f u s i n g the accused's a p p l i c a t i o n f o r r e s t o r a t i o n , Huband, J.A. s t a t e d t h a t " p o s s e s s i o n w i l l not be a l l o w e d i f the cash appears t o be the f r u i t s of i l l e g a l t r a d e i n n a r c o t i c s . The scheme of the Act i s t o deny p o s s e s s i o n of such f u n d s . " 7 3 T h i s expansive i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o b t a i n e d support from the A l b e r t a Queen's Bench i n Re R. and Buxton 7 4 and the O n t a r i o Court of Appeal i n Re R. and L a r q i e . 7 5 However, both went even f u r t h e r than A i m o n e t t i . In Buxton. McFayden J . r e f u s e d an a p p l i c a t i o n on p u b l i c p o l i c y grounds and i n L a r q i e . the Court of Appeal noted t h a t s. 312 makes i l l e g a l the p o s s e s s i o n of the proceeds of drug o f f e n c e s . 7 6 The Manitoba Court of Appeal a l s o accepted the p u b l i c p o l i c y argument, i n R. v• Medd. 7 7 r e f u s i n g r e s t o r a t i o n a f t e r h e a r i n g testimony from the accused t h a t the monies s e i z e d were the 7 1 See R. v. Lewis (1979) 21 A.R. 236 ( A l t a . C.A.). 7 2 (1981) 58 C.C.C. (2d) 164, 24 C R . (3d) 13 (Man. C.A.). Leave t o appeal t o the S.C.C. r e f u s e d on Apr. 27, 1981, l o c . c i t . a t 164n. 7 3 I b i d , a t 172. 7 4 (1981) 62 C.C.C. (2d) 278 ( A l t a Q.B.) a t 281. 7 5 (1981) 63 C.C.C. (2d) 508 (Ont. CA.) a t 511-12. 7 6 MacFarlane notes t h a t the a u t h o r i t i e s are mixed on the a v a i l a b i l i t y , a f t e r an a c q u i t t a l , of r e s t o r a t i o n under s. 16 (supra, n t . 65 a t 470-71). 7 7 (1983) 7 C.C.C. (3d) 158 a t 160 (Man. C.A.). p r o f i t s of u n r e l a t e d , though predominantly i l l e g a l a c t i v i t y . 7 8 In 1986, the Supreme Court of Canada dampened the enthusiasm b u i l d i n g over the Ai m o n e t t i l i n e of cases. In Fleming v. The  Queen. 7 9 i t c o n s i d e r e d a r e s t o r a t i o n a p p l i c a t i o n . Although c o n c l u d i n g t h a t s. 10(6) [now 16(1)] imports the maxim ex t u r p i  causa non o r i t u r a c t i o f o r n a r c o t i c s c o n v i c t i o n s , W i l s o n J . , w r i t i n g f o r the Court, added t h a t the Crown must prove, beyond a rea s o n a b l e doubt, a connection between the s u b j e c t matter and the o f f e n c e , e i t h e r by way of a c o n v i c t i o n f o r the p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e or a s . 312 o f f e n c e , or by evidence i n a c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g . 8 0 In summary, attempts t o u t i l i z e the pre-1989 p r o v i s i o n s of f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s t o c o n f i s c a t e the proceeds of crime were l a r g e l y u n s u c c e s s f u l . What remained was the r a t h e r i n n o v a t i v e a p p l i c a t i o n of common law and e q u i t a b l e d o c t r i n e s . Again the r e s u l t s were not t e r r i b l y s u c c e s s f u l except t o i d e n t i f y the apparent inadequacy of e x i s t i n g s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s . Bona v a c a n t i a 8 1 was the common law d o c t r i n e of c h o i c e i n R. 7 8 MacFarlane suggests t h a t the f o r e g o i n g and o t h e r cases which f o l l o w t h e i r r easoning have e f f e c t i v e l y imported the c i v i l maxim ex t u r p i causa non o r i t u r a c t i o ("a r i g h t of a c t i o n does not a r i s e out of an e v i l cause" ( E l i z a b e t h A. M a r t i n , ed. , The Concise D i c t i o n a r y of Law (Oxford: Univ. P r e s s , 1983) a t 172) i n t o the c r i m i n a l realm (MacFarlane, supra, n t . 65 a t 473)). 7 9 [1986] 1 S.C.R. 415, 25 C.C.C. (3d) 297. 8 0 I b i d , a t 319-20, per Wilson J . 8 1 "Empty goods" i n l i t e r a l E n g l i s h (Martin, supra, n t . 78 a t 38) . 17 v. Smith and Smith. 8 2 During a s. 312 [now 354] se n t e n c i n g h e a r i n g , t he Crown sought c o n f i s c a t i o n of an automobile and rugs purchased w i t h a s s e t s t h a t S i n c l a i r J . of the A l b e r t a Queen's Bench determined were the product of drug t r a f f i c k i n g . Acknowledging the absence of a u t h o r i t y i n the Code t o c o n f i s c a t e these items, he invoked the d o c t r i n e a t the u r g i n g of Crown c o u n s e l . Although unaware of any precedent, he r e l i e d upon the d o c t r i n e ' s p u b l i c p o l i c y b a s i s . 8 3 A c c o r d i n g t o Pro f . H.R.S. Ryan, the d e c i s i o n i s of dubious worth. Ryan observes t h a t bona v a c a n t i a i s a p p l i c a b l e o n l y i n the c i v i l realm, t o p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y d e v o i d o f an owner. 8 4 Mareva i n j u n c t i o n s were and continue t o be used by the Crown t o p revent the d i s s i p a t i o n of the proceeds of crime, pending c i v i l p r o c e e d i n g s t o determine t h e i r ownership. 8 5 Anton P i l l e r o r d e r s p r o v i d e a s i m i l a r form of r e l i e f , a l l o w i n g access t o premises f o r purposes of i n s p e c t i o n , d e t e n t i o n and p r e s e r v a t i o n of p r o p e r t y . 8 6 Both Mareva i n j u n c t i o n s and Anton P i l l e r o r d e r s emanate from the a d (1985) 46 C R . (3d) 278 ( A l t a . Q.B.). 8 3 I b i d , a t 280. 8 4 H.R.S. Ryan, supra. n t . 2. Furthermore, i t i s d o u b t f u l t h a t the Crown demonstrated s u f f i c i e n t t a i n t t o b r i n g the case w i t h i n the ambit of the S . C C 's l a t e r d e c i s i o n i n Fleming, supra, nt. 79. 8 5 See West Mercia Constabulary v. Wagener and Others [1982] 1 W.L.R. 127 (Q.B.), C h i e f Constable of Kent v. V and another [1983] Q.B. 34, [1982] 3 W.L.R. 462, [1982] 3 A l l E.R. 36 ( C A . ) , Canadian P a c i f i c A i r l i n e s L t d . v. Hind (1981) 122 D. L.R. (3d) 498 (Ont. H.C) and Her Majesty the Queen v. Shah,  e t a l . . 5 Dec. 1989, V i c t o r i a , 89/2488, unreported ( B . C . S . C ) . 8 6 Anton P i l l e r KG v. Manufacturing Processes L t d . [1976] 1 A l l E. R. 779 (C.A.). 18 c i v i l c o u r t s and, t h e r e f o r e , r e q u i r e the commencement of p a r a l l e l c i v i l p r o ceedings. Unless a c i v i l cause of a c t i o n i s r e a d i l y apparent, t h e i r use i s p o t e n t i a l l y an abuse of the c o u r t ' s process, an i s s u e c o n s i d e r e d l a t e r i n t h i s Chapter. 8 7 L i k e l y the most common method of d i s g o r g i n g c o n v i c t e d persons of t h e proceeds of crime i s , however, through the i m p o s i t i o n of heavy f i n e s . 8 8 I t would be easy t o conclude t h a t the proceeds of crime amendments were i n s p i r e d by the absence of e f f e c t i v e c o n f i s c a t i o n p r o v i s i o n s i n c r i m i n a l s t a t u t e s , combined w i t h an i n c r e a s e d i n c i d e n c e of drug t r a f f i c k i n g and money l a u n d e r i n g 8 9 i n Canada. 9 0 8 7 For a d i s c u s s i o n of the use of i n j u n c t i o n s i n r e l a t i o n t o monies on d e p o s i t , see C P . Walker, "Opening the V a u l t s -P o l i c e Powers and Bank Accounts," (1983) Cr. L. Rev. 723. 8 8 See R. v. Jung (1976) 1 C R . (3d) S - l (B.C.C.A.), per Mc l n t y r e , J.A. ; R. v. Dow (1976) 1 C R . (3d) S-9 (B.C.C.A.); and MacFarlane, supra. n t. 65 a t 686-87. 8 9 'Money Laundering' or 'money changing' r e f e r s g e n e r a l l y t o the p r o c e s s by which money obtained through i l l e g a l a c t i v i t y i s i n t r o d u c e d t o l e g i t i m a t e banking or ot h e r f i n a n c i a l i n t e r m e d i a r i e s i n order t o conceal i t s i l l e g a l o r i g i n . Laundering i s p r a c t i c e d by many persons, i n c l u d i n g o r g a n i z e d crime f i g u r e s , drug t r a f f i c k e r s and those who wish t o h i d e funds from tax and other government a u t h o r i t i e s . I t becomes a necessary process f o r l a r g e sums of money because o f the sheer weight and bulk of cash, the r i s k of d e t e c t i o n and the danger t o one's person c r e a t e d by c a r r y i n g l a r g e sums of money. With the passage of B i l l C-61, l a u n d e r i n g a c q u i r e d l e g a l s i g n i f i c a n c e and d e f i n i t i o n i n Canada ( C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.31(1)). Numerous co n d u i t s can be used t o f a c i l i t a t e the p r o c e s s , i n c l u d i n g banks and t r u s t companies, r e a l e s t a t e v e n t u r e s , f o r e i g n exchange d e a l e r s and brokerage f i r m s . Oftentimes money i s exported through such a c o n d u i t and l a t e r r e p a t r i a t e d by v a r i o u s means. Canada, f o r example, may a c t as the source of funds i n the case of domestic c r i m i n a l s l a u n d e r i n g monies or as a r e c i p i e n t f o r f o r e i g n c r i m i n a l s elements. In a d d i t i o n , c o n s i d e r a b l e cash i s laundered without l e a v i n g the country. 19 9 0 The p r o v i n c e s of B r i t i s h Columbia and O n t a r i o p r o v i d e d the i n i t i a l domestic impetus f o r c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n . A 1980 study conducted f o r the p r o v i n c i a l government i n B r i t i s h Columbia recommended l e g i s l a t i v e amendments t o the C r i m i n a l Code, a k i n t o the Racketeer I n f l u e n c e d and Corrupt O r g a n i z a t i o n s (RICO) p r o v i s i o n s i n U n i t e d S t a t e s f e d e r a l and s t a t e law, i n order t o t a r g e t the proceeds of o r g a n i z e d or e n t e r p r i s e crime. I t a l s o recommended the i n c l u s i o n of a r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e t o d e a l with the problem of t r a c i n g i l l e g a l funds. As a guidepost, i t suggested t h a t c o n f i s c a t i o n be a v a i l a b l e f o r the same o f f e n c e s t o which the e l e c t r o n i c eavesdropping p r o v i s i o n s of the Code a p p l i e d and urged t h a t the p r o v i n c e enact p a r a l l e l l e g i s l a t i o n t o a i d the p u b l i c and p r i v a t e v i c t i m s of the s p e c i f i e d o f f e n c e s ( J i l l M c l n t y r e and Alexander G. Henderson, The B u s i n e s s of  Crime - An E v a l u a t i o n of the American "Racketeer I n f l u e n c e d  and C o r r u p t O r g a n i z a t i o n s " S t a t u t e from a Canadian  P e r s p e c t i v e - E x e c u t i v e Summary and D r a f t Amendments t o the  " C r i m i n a l Code" ( M i n i s t r y of A t t o r n e y - G e n e r a l , C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e D i v i s i o n , 1980) a t 4-5) . The B r i t i s h Columbia p r o p o s a l and a s i m i l a r one from O n t a r i o were presented t o the 1981 Uniform Law Conference of Canada, C r i m i n a l Law S e c t i o n meeting. L a t e r i n the same year, f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l l e a d e r s agreed t o form a j o i n t study group, the F e d e r a l / P r o v i n c i a l Task Force on E n t e r p r i s e Crime, composed of persons drawn from government, academia, p r i v a t e law p r a c t i c e and law enforcement. The study group concluded i t s r e p o r t i n June 1983, acknowledging the prevalence of e n t e r p r i s e crime i n Canada and the i n a b i l i t y of present s t a t u t e s t o e x e r t e f f e c t i v e c o n t r o l , due p r i n c i p a l l y t o the absence of a c o n f i s c a t i o n mechanism f o r the proceeds of crime. I t recommended the i n t r o d u c t i o n of l e g i s l a t i o n s i m i l a r t o B i l l C-61 (Dept. of J u s t i c e , E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Report. Ottawa, 10 June 1983) . However, the study group d i d not achieve unanimity i n i t s work. In a d i s s e n t which accepted the need f o r l e g i s l a t i o n but d i s p u t e d the b a s i s f o r c e r t a i n of the r e p o r t ' s recommendations, John Hogarth d e s c r i b e d the r e p o r t as "a remarkable p i e c e of advocacy. I t s t a r t s w i t h a c o n c l u s i o n ( t h a t powerful new l e g a l t o o l s are r e q u i r e d t o d e a l w i t h " e n t e r p r i s e crime") and then goes on t o m o b i l i z e " f a c t s " , l e g a l a n a l y s i s and arguments t o support i t " ( " E n t e r p r i s e Crime  Study Report" - A C r i t i g u e . Rome, 15 Dec. 198 3 a t 1). Hogarth expressed concern with a somewhat b i a s e d accumulation of s u p p o r t i n g data and a l e s s than adequate treatment of the c r i t i c a l due process component i n Canada's post-1981 c r i m i n a l law ( i b i d , a t 2-3). The domestic push a l s o i n c l u d e d law enforcement. Beginning i n 1981, the R.C.M.P. e s t a b l i s h e d a n t i - d r u g p r o f i t e e r i n g u n i t s throughout Canada, a l l i e d t o e x i s t i n g 20 However, d e s p i t e the pronouncements of p o l i t i c a n s 9 1 and law enforcement o f f i c i a l s , 9 2 such a s i m p l i s t i c p u b l i c p o l i c y r a t i o n a l e s u f f e r s from a t l e a s t two problems. F i r s t , i t f a i l s t o c o n s i d e r t h a t the l e g i s l a t i o n a p p l i e s t o a wide panoply of o f f e n c e s , 9 3 drug o f f e n c e s b e i ng but the t i p of the p r o v e r b i a l i c e b e r g , 9 4 and second, drug s e c t i o n s . E n t e r p r i s e crime u n i t s w i t h i n commercial crime s e c t i o n s developed l a t e r . Due t o the d e l a y i n passage and f u l l implementation of the amendments, these u n i t s have ye t t o be f u l l y e x p l o i t e d . 9 1 Leading o f f the debate p r i o r t o second r e a d i n g of B i l l C-61, the f e d e r a l M i n i s t e r of J u s t i c e , Ray Hnatyshyn, expressed h i s o p i n i o n t h a t the l e g i s l a t i o n would "go a l o n g way toward making [ex t u r p i causa non o r i t u r a c t i o ] a r e a l i t y i n our c o u n t r y " (House of Commons Debates ( h e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o as the Debates), 14 Sept. 1987 a t 8890). 9 2 I t i s d e s c r i b e d by some as a panacea. The argument c o n t i n u e s t h a t t r a d i t i o n a l methods of drug enforcement are inadequate. The media and enforcement agencies are awash w i t h s t a t i s t i c s intended t o d e s c r i b e the e x t e n t of money l a u n d e r i n g i n Canada. For example, a r e c e n t magazine noted t h a t " [ s ] e n i o r law enforcement o f f i c i a l s m a i n t a i n t h a t Vancouver serves as a r e l a y s t a t i o n f o r r o u g h l y h a l f of more than $ 2 - b i l l i o n i n i l l e g a l drug p r o f i t s f u n n e l e d o f f s h o r e and brought back i n t o Canada d i s g u i s e d as l e g i t i m a t e investments" ("Big Time Crime," (Sept. 1989) 7 E q u i t y 14 a t 16) . Due t o the u b i q u i t o u s nature of the p r a c t i c e , i t i s d i f f i c u l t , i f not impossible, t o i s o l a t e a c c u r a t e s t a t i s t i c s . 9 3 I n c l u d e d among e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e s are, i n t e r a l i a . b r i b e r y , f r a u d , breach of t r u s t , c o r r u p t i n g morals, keeping a bawdy house, p r o c u r i n g , murder, t h e f t , robbery, e x t o r t i o n , f o r g e r y , arson, and making and p o s s e s s i n g c o u n t e r f e i t money (Code, s. 462.3). 9 4 The q u e s t i o n which begs a response i s whether or not an e n t e r p r i s e crime problem of s u f f i c i e n t s e v e r i t y e x i s t s i n t h i s c ountry t o j u s t i f y e x t r a o r d i n a r y c r i m i n a l remedies. The answer t o t h i s q u e s t i o n becomes important from a l e g a l p e r s p e c t i v e when c o n s i d e r i n g s. 1 of the C h a r t e r . V o i c e s are emerging from the w i l d e r n e s s i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s t o suggest t h a t the 'drug war' i s more p o l i t i c a l hype than r e a l i t y . W r i t i n g i n Newsweek, Rufus King notes t h a t heightened law enforcement, severe s a n c t i o n s and p o l i t i c a l 21 i t does not e x p l a i n why the p r i o r i t y accorded t r a d i t i o n a l drug enforcement work has not i n c r e a s e d a p p r e c i a b l y d u r i n g the p a s t decade. 9 5 The t r u e r a t i o n a l e may l i e i n the area of Canada's i n t e r n a t i o n a l commitments. THE INTERNATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SCHEME J u s t i c e M i n i s t e r Doug Lewis a l l u d e d t o these commitments when he l e d o f f the second r e a d i n g debate on B i l l C-61. A c c o r d i n g t o Lewis: On an i n t e r n a t i o n a l l e v e l , t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n i s i n compliance w i t h the d r a f t U n i t e d Nations Convention A g a i n s t I l l i c i t T r a f f i c i n N a r c o t i c Drugs and P s y c h o a c t i v e Substances. S i m i l a r l e g i s l a t i o n has e i t h e r been passed or has been pr e s e n t e d t o the l e g i s l a t u r e s of B r i t a i n , A u s t r a l i a and the U n i t e d S t a t e s . 9 6 He a l s o expressed concern f o r the f u t u r e : To prevent Canada from becoming a haven f o r the proceeds of crime, the l e g i s l a t i o n w i l l f o r f e i t a s s e t s on Canadian r h e t o r i c d i d not cure the problem i n the p a s t , j u s t as they d i d not adequately address the problems posed by p r o h i b i t i o n e a r l i e r i n t h i s century. He compares 5,788 d r u g - r e l a t e d deaths i n 27 c i t i e s t o the much g r e a t e r damage wrought by smoking and a l c o h o l , recommending l e g a l i z a t i o n as a more v i a b l e s o l u t i o n ("A Worthless Crusade," 1 Jan. 1990). 9 5 Canadian p o l i c e s t i l l l a g f a r behind t h e i r American c o u n t e r p a r t s i n terms of f i n a n c i a l r e s o u r c e s f o r s p e c i a l i z e d equipment, source h a n d l i n g and drug purchases. In a d d i t i o n , they are mired i n j u r i s d i c t i o n a l d i s c o r d , r e s t r i c t e d i n t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s overseas and l a r g e l y dependant on U n i t e d S t a t e s law enforcement agencies f o r much of t h e i r i n t e l l i g e n c e i n f o r m a t i o n . 9 6 Debates, 14 Sept. 1987 a t 8888. 22 s o i l no matter where the c r i m i n a l conduct has taken p l a c e . 9 7 W i t h i n the world community, Canada i s not alone i n i t s l e g i s l a t i v e e f f o r t s t o c o n f i s c a t e the proceeds of crime. In f a c t , s i m i l a r moves are f a s t becoming the norm, a v i r t u a l n e c e s s i t y f o r any n a t i o n t h a t wishes t o express i t s abhorrence of i n t e r n a t i o n a l drug t r a f f i c k i n g and money l a u n d e r i n g . To i g n o r e the drug wars be i n g fought i n many p a r t s of the globe i n v i t e s both d i s c r e d i t and a degree of i s o l a t i o n i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y and opens a n a t i o n t o i n f i l t r a t i o n by drug c a r t e l s wishing t o t r a n s - s h i p n a r c o t i c s or launder money. 9 8 M. C h e r i f B a s s i o u n i d e s c r i b e s the e v o l u t i o n of an i n t e r n a t i o n a l n a r c o t i c s c o n t r o l scheme as dependant "on the w i l l f u l compliance and c o o p e r a t i o n of member s t a t e s o f the world 9 7 I b i d , a t 8890. 9 8 The American 'war on drugs,' which began d u r i n g the Reagan p r e s i d e n c y and gathered momentum under the Bush a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , views i n t e r n a t i o n a l borders as temporary o b s t a c l e s t o be circumvented. In the producer c o u n t r i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y of C e n t r a l and South America, t h i s i s accomplished through massive e r a d i c a t i o n programs and i n v e s t i g a t i o n s spearheaded by American drug agents, o f t e n a s s i s t e d by components of the Un i t e d S t a t e s m i l i t a r y . In the h o s t c o u n t r i e s , p o l i t i c a l and d i p l o m a t i c p r e s s u r e , as w e l l as e f f e c t i v e use of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l media, f o s t e r the aims of t h i s unorthodox war. In Canada's case, American law enforcement agents have even taken t o j o k i n g about t h i s country's approach t o money l a u n d e r i n g . A r e c e n t newsmagazine a r t i c l e noted t h a t U n i t e d S t a t e s Drug Enforcement A d m i n i s t r a t i o n (DEA) agents " l a u g h i n g l y r e f e r t o Canada as the 'Maytag' of the money-l a u n d e r i n g i n d u s t r y " ("Hiding the Drug Money," Maclean's. 23 Oct. 1989 a t 42). 23 community." 9 9 Between 1912 and 1972 twelve m u l t i l a t e r a l t r e a t i e s , c a l l i n g f o r both domestic enforcement and i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n t o stem drug t r a f f i c k i n g , were co n c l u d e d . 1 0 0 B a s s i o u n i notes t h a t by 1986 the i n t e r n a t i o n a l e f f o r t i n c l u d e d 110 n a t i o n s . 1 0 1 In 1988 the Un i t e d Nations adopted the co n v e n t i o n r e s p e c t i n g i l l e g a l t r a f f i c k i n g r e f e r r e d t o by the J u s t i c e M i n i s t e r , as a supplement t o e x i s t i n g c o n v e n t i o n s . 1 0 2 Canada i s p a r t y t o the document which, i n t e r a l i a , p r o v i d e s t h a t s i g n a t o r i e s must p r o h i b i t 9 9 M. C h e r i f B a s s i o u n i , "The I n t e r n a t i o n a l N a r c o t i c s C o n t r o l Scheme," i n B a s s i o u n i , ed., I n t e r n a t i o n a l C r i m i n a l Law.  Volume 1 - Crimes (Dobbs F e r r y , N.Y.: T r a n s n a t i o n a l , 1986) a t 507. Volume 2 - Procedure p r o v i d e s a comprehensive overview of mutual a s s i s t a n c e t r e a t i e s and the p r o c e d u r a l i s s u e s i n v o l v e d i n o b t a i n i n g evidence abroad. 1 0 0 I b i d , a t 508. 1 0 1 I b i d . Whether the present extent of i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o o p e r a t i o n warrants p l a c i n g drug t r a f f i c k i n g i n the cat e g o r y of a s u b s t a n t i v e i n t e r n a t i o n a l c r i m i n a l o f f e n c e i s not c l e a r . C o n s i d e r a b l e a u t h o r i t y e x i s t s f o r the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t aggression, war crimes, genocide and p i r a c y , and p o s s i b l y s l a v e r y , a p a r t h e i d , t o r t u r e and t e r r o r i s m are such o f f e n c e s ( D a n i e l H. Derby, "A Framework f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l C r i m i n a l Law," i n B a s s i o u n i , Volume 1. supra. n t . 99 a t 33-6). Depending on one's d e f i n i t i o n of an i n t e r n a t i o n a l crime, drug t r a f f i c k i n g may have a c q u i r e d such dubious s t a t u s . A l l i e d c l o s e l y t o the concept of i n t e r n a t i o n a l c r i m i n a l law i s the d o c t r i n e of u n i v e r s a l j u r i s d i c t i o n , which p e r m i t s n a t i o n s t o ignore the j u r i s d i c t i o n a l f r a i l t i e s of t h e i r domestic law when p r o s e c u t i n g persons a l l e g e d t o have committed i n t e r n a t i o n a l crimes (see g e n e r a l l y Kenneth C. R a n d a l l , " U n i v e r s a l J u r i s d i c t i o n Under I n t e r n a t i o n a l Law," (1988) 66 Texas L. Rev. 785). 1 0 2 U n i t e d Nations Convention a g a i n s t I l l i c i t T r a f f i c i n  N a r c o t i c Drugs and P s y c h o t r o p i c Substances. adopted i n Vienna on Dec. 19, 1988 and signed by Canada on the f o l l o w i n g day. See Paul S a i n t - D e n i s , "The U n i t e d Nations Convention a g a i n s t I l l i c i t T r a f f i c i n N a r c o t i c Drugs and P s y c h o t r o p i c Substances," unpub. paper, NCPC. 24 the l a u n d e r i n g 1 0 3 and permit the c o n f i s c a t i o n of proceeds from drug t r a f f i c k i n g and f u r t h e r , must honour c o u r t o r d e r s of l i k e k i n d from f e l l o w s i g n a t o r i e s . 1 0 4 In a d d i t i o n , i t r e q u i r e s t h a t p a r t i e s p r o v i d e a wide range of a s s i s t a n c e i n the i n v e s t i g a t i o n and p r o s e c u t i o n of such o f f e n c e s . 1 0 5 C l o s e l y a l l i e d t o the i n t e r n a t i o n a l conventions are complex networks of t r e a t i e s between c o u n t r i e s which attempt t o i n t e r f a c e n a t i o n a l schemes. In 1983, John Hogarth d e s c r i b e d Canada as "one of the few developed n a t i o n s t h a t [had] not seen f i t t o e n t e r i n any b i l a t e r a l or m u l t i l a t e r a l t r e a t i e s f o r mutual a s s i s t a n c e i n c r i m i n a l matters," l e a v i n g i t dependant on "the i n c h o a t e d o c t r i n e i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l law of comity or r i d e on the c o a t - t a i l s of f o r e i g n p o l i c e a g e n c i e s . " 1 0 6 T h i s i s o l a t i o n i s m i s f a s t coming t o an end. In response t o Canada's p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the 1988 U n i t e d Nations Convention, P a r l i a m e n t passed B i l l C-58, the Mutual L e g a l A s s i s t a n c e i n  C r i m i n a l Matters A c t . 1 0 7 I t complements the proceeds of crime l e g i s l a t i o n by paving the way f o r Canada's completion of mutual a s s i s t a n c e t r e a t i e s with other n a t i o n s i n the areas of p r i s o n e r and evidence t r a n s f e r s f o r c o u r t purposes, e n f o r c i n g f o r e i g n f i n e s and 1 0 3 U n i t e d Nations Convention, supra. n t. 102, a r t . 3. 1 0 4 I b i d . , a r t . 5. 1 0 5 I b i d . , a r t . 7. 1 0 6 Hogarth, supra, n t. 90 a t 12. 1 0 7 S.C. 1988, c. 37 r e c e i v e d t h i r d r e a d i n g moments b e f o r e B i l l C-61 on 7 J u l y 1988. I t obtained Royal Assent on 28 J u l y 1988 and came i n t o f o r c e on 1 Oct. 1988. honouring f o r e i g n requests f o r searches, s e i z u r e s and the p r o d u c t i o n of witnesses. In a d d i t i o n , the t r e a t i e s are not r e s t r i c t e d t o drug m a t t e r s . 1 0 8 Domestic c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n has a long h i s t o r y i n those European n a t i o n s which possess a c i v i l i a n l e g a l system. Such was not the case, u n t i l r e c e n t l y , i n most c o u n t r i e s which owe t h e i r l e g a l h e r i t a g e t o the B r i t i s h common law. A s u r p r i s i n g e x c e p t i o n when one c o n s i d e r s the h i s t o r y of i t s b i r t h as a n a t i o n , i s the U n i t e d S t a t e s , which long ago overcame i t s pubescent d i s l i k e f o r c e n t r a l government's power t o tax and s e i z e . P r e s e n t l y i t leads the common law n a t i o n s i n both i t s c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n and i t s r e g u l a t i o n of money l a u n d e r i n g . Furthermore, i t t a k e s a back seat t o no n a t i o n when i t comes t o u r g i n g and u s i n g f o r c e f u l p e r s u a s i o n on o t h e r s t o f o l l o w s u i t . The U n i t e d S t a t e s America's f o r f e i t u r e l e g i s l a t i o n can be t r a c e d as f a r back as the e a r l y n i n e t e e n t h century. I t demonstrates a ready w i l l i n g n e s s t o permit forms of s t a t u t o r y f o r f e i t u r e , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o customs and revenue laws. Widely used d u r i n g the c i v i l war t o d i s p o s s e s Confederate landowners, i t found succour i n the a n t i -1 0 8 Canada si g n e d such t r e a t i e s with the U n i t e d S t a t e s i n 1985, Great B r i t a i n i n 1988 and Mexico i n 1990. 2 6 t r u s t laws of the l a t e n i n e t e e n t h and e a r l y t w e n t i e t h c e n t u r i e s . 1 0 9 America's modern age of c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n can be t r a c e d t o the f e d e r a l government's awakened i n t e r e s t i n o r g a n i z e d crime, p a r t i c u l a r l y the Cosa Nostra f a m i l i e s , d u r i n g the l a t e 1960's. 1 1 0 P r e s i d e n t Nixon s i g n e d the Organized Crime C o n t r o l A c t of 1970 i n t o law on October 15, 1970. 1 1 1 Contained w i t h i n T i t l e IX of the b i l l was the Racketeer I n f l u e n c e d and Corrupt O r g a n i z a t i o n s A c t (RICO) , 1 1 2 c r i m i n a l and c i v i l 1 1 3 p r o v i s i o n s which p r o s c r i b e the 1 0 9 Hodgson, supra. nt. 2 a t 3 0-1. A l e g a c y of t h e s e e a r l y days i s the c o n t i n u i n g d i s t i n c t i o n which American s t a t u t e s draw between c r i m i n a l and c i v i l f o r f e i t u r e . David F r i e d d e s c r i b e s i t i n the f o l l o w i n g terms: C r i m i n a l f o r f e i t u r e , a l s o known as i n personam f o r f e i t u r e , i s the t a k i n g of p r o p e r t y by the s t a t e as an i n c i d e n t of c o n v i c t i o n f o r crime.... I t i s thus opposed t o c i v i l i n rem f o r f e i t u r e , the t a k i n g of p r o p e r t y i n some way connected with the commission of a crime r e g a r d l e s s of the c r i m i n a l g u i l t of i t s p o s s e s s o r or owner. In c i v i l f o r f e i t u r e s , the owner of the p r o p e r t y has the burden of proof once the government has shown probable cause t o b e l i e v e t h a t the p r o p e r t y i s " g u i l t y , " i n other words, connected w i t h the p r o h i b i t e d a c t i v i t y . The standard of p r o o f i s a preponderance of the evidence (supra, n t . 26). 1 1 0 'Awakened* because the legendery head of the F e d e r a l Bureau of I n v e s t i g a t i o n , J . Edgar Hoover, r e f u s e d f o r years t o admit the e x i s t e n c e of organized crime. As a r e s u l t of i n c r e a s e d p u b l i c concern, the U n i t e d S t a t e s developed v a r i o u s l e g i s l a t i v e i n i t i a t i v e s d u r i n g the 1960's which t a r g e t t e d o r g a n i z e d crime and the q u a l i t y of law enforcement. 1 1 1 Pub. L. No. 91-452, (1970) 84 S t a t . 922, as c o d i f i e d i n (1982) 18 U.S.C. and 28 U.S.C. See Joseph C. Sweeney, "An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o RICO," (1987) 12 T u l . Mar. Law J . 7 a t 8. 1 1 2 18 U.S.C, s s . 1961-68 (1982 & Supp. IV 1986) c r e a t e d f o u r new c r i m i n a l o f f e n c e s and one c i v i l o f f e n c e . A wealth of j u d i c i a l d e c i s i o n s and s c h o l a r l y a r t i c l e s e x p l o r e the f e d e r a l and s t a t e RICO s t a t u t e s , too numerous t o enumerate i n t h i s t h e s i s . N e v e r t h e l e s s 2 7 v a l u a b l e r e f e r e n c e s i n c l u d e a 27 a c q u i s i t i o n and o p e r a t i o n of e n t e r p r i s e s engaged i n i n t e r s t a t e commerce through a p a t t e r n of r a c k e t t e r i n g a c t i v i t y . 1 1 4 In a d d i t i o n t o standard punishments, 1 1 5 the l e g i s l a t i o n p r o v i d e s f o r the c o n f i s c a t i o n of the p r o f i t s of crime and any i n t e r e s t i n c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s . 1 1 6 I t a l s o permits the p r e - t r i a l s e i z u r e and r e s t r a i n t of p r o p e r t y . 1 1 7 RICO r e c e i v e d f r e s h l i f e i n the 1980's w i t h the b e l a t e d d i s c o v e r y of i t s c i v i l f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s by p r a c t i t i o n e r s i n many d i v e r s e areas of p r a c t i c e and l a t e r by the onslaught of the •drug war* being waged both w i t h i n and without the U n i t e d S t a t e s . Being of s u f f i c i e n t breadth t o adapt w e l l t o the new c h a l l e n g e , RICO and r e l a t e d s t a t u t e s now spearhead the American c r i m i n a l study paper produced by the S e c r e t a r i a t of the S o l i c i t o r G eneral of Canada, The RICO S t a t u t e ; An Overview (n.p., June 1982) and a r e c e n t c r i t i c i s m of RICO by David F r i e d (supra. n t . 26). 1 1 3 Sweeney notes t h a t the c i v i l p r o v i s i o n s were intended "as a c i v i l remedy f o r the c r i m i n a l v i o l a t i o n s a l r e a d y p r o v i d e d f o r i n s. 1962. C i v i l RICO i s intended t o a s s i s t i n the reform of c o r r u p t e d o r g a n i z a t i o n s " (supra, n t . I l l a t 9). 1 1 4 I b i d , a t 8-9. By u s i n g the term ' e n t e r p r i s e , ' RICO was i n t e n t i o n a l l y not r e s t r i c t e d t o organized crime ( S o l i c i t o r G eneral of Canada, The RICO S t a t u t e : An Overview, supra. n t . 112 a t 5). A p a r a l l e l s t a t u t e which t a r g e t t e d drug e n t e r p r i s e s , the Continuing C r i m i n a l E n t e r p r i s e s A c t (21 U.S.C., s. 848 (1982 and Supp. I l l 1985) was c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n T i t l e I I of the Comprehensive Drug Abuse P r e v e n t i o n  and C o n t r o l Act of 1970. 1 1 5 Imprisonment and f i n e s . 1 1 6 S o l i c i t o r General of Canada, The RICO S t a t u t e - An  Overview. supra. n t . 112 a t 8. 1 1 7 I b i d a t 25. 28 j u s t i c e system's c o n f i s c a t i o n d r i v e . The l e g i s l a t i o n l o n g ago wi t h s t o o d i t s most c r i t i c a l t e s t s w i t h i n the c o u r t s , o b t a i n i n g not o n l y s a n c t i o n from the Un i t e d S t a t e s Supreme Court, but a l s o a brea d t h not o r i g i n a l l y a n t i c i p a t e d . 1 1 8 In r e c e n t years, Congress passed other l e g i s l a t i o n intended t o b u t t r e s s RICO even f u r t h e r . The Comprehensive F o r f e i t u r e A c t of  1984 1 1 9 i n c r e a s e d the number of p r e d i c a t e RICO o f f e n c e s , i n c l u d i n g some which r e g u l a t e d money l a u n d e r i n g and f e d e r a l drug o f f e n c e s , and a u t h o r i z e d the p r e - t r i a l r e s t r a i n t of p r o p e r t y . The Money  Laundering C o n t r o l Act 1986 extended the reach of c r i m i n a l law over money l a u n d e r i n g . 1 2 0 The American approach t o the problem i s of c r i t i c a l importance t o Canada f o r two reasons: f i r s t , the p r i n c i p a l t h r u s t and many p r o c e d u r a l and s u b s t a n t i v e aspects of Canada's proceeds of crime l e g i s l a t i o n are a product of the RICO experience and second, the absence of j u r i s p r u d e n c e i n the area of c o n f i s c a t i o n w i l l i n e v i t a b l y f o r c e Canadian c o u r t s t o seek guidance from U n i t e d S t a t e s judgments, p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n s t i t u t i o n a l cases. 1 1 8 In Sedima. S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co. (1985) 473 U.S. 479, the U.S.S.C. r e f u s e d t o l i m i t the a v a i l a b i l i t y of RICO t o o n l y c e r t a i n l i t i g a n t s , such as government (Sweeney, supra. n t . I l l a t 8) . T h i s d e c i s i o n opened the gates and RICO became a powerful t o o l , p o s s e s s i n g "something f o r everybody" ( i b i d , a t 10). 1 1 9 18 U.S.C. . S . 1963 (a)(3) (Supp. I l l 1985). 1 2 0 S u b t i t l e H of T i t l e I of the Anti-Drug Abuse A c t 1986. See g e n e r a l l y F r i e d , s u p r a f nt. 26 a t 329-30. 29 B r i t a i n B r i t a i n was not as f o r t u n a t e as the U n i t e d S t a t e s i n terms of preparedness. Before 1986, i t had v i r t u a l l y no l e g i s l a t i o n which e f f e c t i v e l y t a r g e t t e d the proceeds of crime. In many ways i t s s i t u a t i o n m i r r o r e d t h a t of Canada and most oth e r Commonwealth c o u n t r i e s . 1 2 1 M a r t i n Wasik d e s c r i b e s i t as "a s t a r t l i n g i n a b i l i t y of the c r i m i n a l c o u r t s t o use t h e i r powers of f o r f e i t u r e t o d e p r i v e an o f f e n d e r of the p r o f i t s of c r i m e . " 1 2 2 The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, 1 2 3 a k i n t o the r e s t o r a t i o n p r o v i s i o n s of Canada's N a r c o t i c  C o n t r o l A c t , obtained a r e s t r i c t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n i n the c o u r t s , p r e v e n t i n g c o n f i s c a t i o n of most monies a s s o c i a t e d t o drug o f f e n c e s . S i m i l a r l y , s p e c i f i c s t a t u t o r y f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s and the g e n e r a l f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n i n the Powers of C r i m i n a l Courts A c t 1973. 1 2 4 a k i n t o Canada's s. 490(9) (d), a p p l i e d o n l y t o evidence and contraband. A c t i n g i n p a r t on the recommendations of the Hodgson Committee, a blue r i b b o n panel of j u r i s t s , lawyers and academics, 1 2 1 S i m i l a r t o Canada's C r i m i n a l Code. B r i t i s h s t a t u t e s c o n t a i n e d numerous s p e c i f i c f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s and a g e n e r a l p r o v i s i o n i n s. 43 of the Powers of C r i m i n a l Courts  A c t 197 3 (supra, n t. 2). None p e r m i t t e d the c o n f i s c a t i o n of the p r o f i t s of crime, o n l y evidence and contraband. 1 2 2 M a r t i n Wasik, "The Hodgson Committee Report on the P r o f i t s o f Crime and T h e i r Recovery," (1984) Crim. L. Rev. 708. 1 2 3 28 S t a t s . 500. 1 2 4 1973, c. 62. 30 B r i t a i n sought t o remedy the s i t u a t i o n d u r i n g the p a s t decade. 1 2 5 The Drug T r a f f i c k i n g Offences Act 1986 1 2 6 and the C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e  A c t 19 8 8 1 2 7 now permit the c o n f i s c a t i o n of the proceeds of drug o f f e n c e s and o t h e r c r i m i n a l o f f e n c e s , r e s p e c t i v e l y . 1 2 8 A u s t r a l i a In r e c e n t years, the Commonwealth and s t a t e governments i n A u s t r a l i a enacted a number of s t a t u t e s aimed a t c o n f i s c a t i n g the proceeds of crime. In a manner s i m i l a r t o Canada, the debut of the Commonwealth Proceeds of Crime Act 1987 1 2 9 was t o u t e d by the A t t o r n e y General of A u s t r a l i a "as p r o v i d i n g some of the most e f f e c t i v e weaponry a g a i n s t major crime ever i n t r o d u c e d i n t o P a r l i a m e n t . " 1 3 0 The l e g i s l a t i o n i s s i m i l a r t o the Canadian amendments, although i t and r e l a t e d a c t s appear t o go f u r t h e r i n 1 2 5 An overview of the Hodgson Committee r e p o r t i s found i n Wasik, supra, nt. 122. 1 2 6 1986, c. 32. 1 2 7 1988, c. 33. 1 2 8 See Hodgson, supra. nt. 2 f o r a d e t a i l e d overview of the development of c o n f i s c a t i o n and f o r f e i t u r e l e g i s l a t i o n i n B r i t a i n and James Morton, The C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e A c t s 1987 and  1988 - A Commentary (London: Waterlow, 1988) a t 129-33 f o r a review of the e f f e c t of the most r e c e n t s t a t u t o r y amendments. 1 2 9 1987, No. 87, as amended. A l s o , see the Proceeds of  Crime (Miscellaneous) Act. 1987, No. 73. 1 3 0 A r i e F r e i b e r g , " R i p p l e s from the Bottom of the Harbour: Some S o c i a l R a m i f i c a t i o n s of T a x a t i o n Fraud," (1988) 12 Cr.  L. J . 136 a t 176. 31 the r e g u l a t i o n of the banking i n d u s t r y and i n the p r o v i s i o n of a t r a c i n g mechanism. 1 3 1 As with Canada, i t s i n t r o d u c t i o n c o i n c i d e d w i t h l e g i s l a t i o n intended t o c r e a t e a framework f o r the r a t i f i c a t i o n of mutual a s s i s t a n c e t r e a t i e s i n c r i m i n a l m a t t e r s . 1 3 2 In summary, wh i l e the United S t a t e s opened the door t o modern c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n , B r i t a i n and A u s t r a l i a c u r r e n t l y p r o v i d e the most popu l a r models f o r common law n a t i o n s . 1 3 3 In c o n c e r t w i t h the c o n f i s c a t i o n laws i n c i v i l i a n c o u n t r i e s and the new found c o o p e r a t i o n i n c r i m i n a l matters among many n a t i o n s , i n c r e a s i n g l y t r e a t y - b a s e d and l e s s dependant on comity, i t seems c l e a r t h a t i l l i c i t drug t r a f f i c k i n g may soon, i f i t has not a l r e a d y , achieve the s t a t u s of a de f a c t o i n t e r n a t i o n a l c r i m e . 1 3 4 THE CLASSIC NORMS AND TRADITIONS OF CANADIAN CRIMINAL LAW In the Anglo-American common law t r a d i t i o n , c o n s i d e r a b l e emphasis i s p l a c e d on the d i s t i n c t i o n , on both s u b s t a n t i v e and p r o c e d u r a l l e v e l s , between c r i m i n a l and c i v i l law. The l i n e of demarcation between the two i s l a r g e l y a r t i f i c i a l , however. As Kenny observed many years ago: 1 3 1 I b i d . 1 3 2 I b i d , a t 175. 1 3 3 See Bruce Z a g a r i s and Marcus Bornheim, " F o r e i g n and I n t e r n a t i o n a l Money Laundering Laws," i n American Bar Assoc., Crim. J u s t i c e S e c , Manual on Money Laundering. 8 Mar. 1990. 1 3 4 R a n d a l l , supra. nt. 101. 32 C r i m i n a l wrongs and c i v i l wrongs...are not s h a r p l y separated groups of a c t s ; but are o f t e n one and the same a c t as viewed from d i f f e r e n t s t a n d p o i n t s , the d i f f e r e n c e b e i n g one not of nature but o n l y of r e l a t i o n . To ask c o n c e r n i n g any occurrence, "Is t h i s a crime or i s i t a t o r t ? " i s - t o borrow S i r James Stephen's apt i l l u s t r a t i o n - no w i s e r than i t would be t o ask concerning a man, "Is he a f a t h e r or a son?" 1 3 5 The c r i m i n a l law-making power accorded the f e d e r a l government by s. 91(27) of the C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t 1867 g i v e s P a r l i a m e n t the u n f e t t e r e d r i g h t t o make c e r t a i n behaviour the s u b j e c t of both p u b l i c p r o s e c u t i o n and penal s a n c t i o n , ergo, a c r i m e . 1 3 6 I t s d i s c r e t i o n i s broad; a k i n t o Graham Parker's b e l i e f t h a t "[a] crime can be d e f i n e d as any form of human a c t i v i t y t h a t the law d e f i n e s as a c r i m e . " 1 3 7 Determining what conduct P a r l i a m e n t should c r i m i n a l i z e i s a more d i f f i c u l t , some might say b e d e v i l i n g , q u e s t i o n . 1 3 8 Many years ago, Kenny noted t h a t the c r i m i n a l i z a t i o n of Courtney S. Kenny, O u t l i n e s of C r i m i n a l Law, r e v . G. Godfrey P h i l l i p s , 15th ed. (Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1942) a t 22. 1 3 6 C o n s t i t u t i o n Act. 1867 f U.K., 30 and 31 V i c t . , c. 3., s. 91(27). 1 3 7 Graham Parker, An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o C r i m i n a l Law. 3rd ed. , (Toronto: Methuen, 1987) a t 1. In o r d e r t o a s s i s t l e g i s l a t o r s i n d e t e r m i n i n g what conduct should be c l a s s e d as c r i m i n a l , Kenny adopts c r i t e r i a suggested by Bentham: the wrong must be g r e a t e r than the e f f e c t s of c r i m i n a l s a n c t i o n and a l a s t r e s o r t , s a n c t i o n e d by the community, capable of p r e c i s e d e f i n i t i o n and p r o v a b l e by c o n v i n c i n g evidence (Kenny, supra. nt. 135 a t 28-30). 1 3 8 S t u a r t observes t h a t modern c r i m i n o l o g i s t s are i n c r e a s i n g l y a v o i d i n g the search f o r an a l l - e m b r a c i n g answer. He notes Barbara Wootton's " c o n t e n t i o n t h a t c r i m i n a l behaviour c o v e r s too l a r g e a range of human behaviour t o be c l a s s i f i e d and analyzed, a m i s c e l l a n e o u s aggregate of q u i t e d i f f e r e n t k i n d s of a c t i o n " (Don S t u a r t , Canadian C r i m i n a l Law - A  T r e a t i s e (Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1987) a t 47). 33 conduct i s an ongoing process whereby p a r t i c u l a r wrongs " i n s p i r e the community wi t h new apprehension, e i t h e r on account of [ t h e i r ] unusual frequency or of some new d i s c o v e r y of [ t h e i r ] i l l e f f e c t s . " 1 3 9 Jerome H a l l observed t h a t crime means d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s t o d i f f e r e n t people, a prime example b e i n g the a p p r o p r i a t e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n f o r behaviour c o n s i d e r e d immoral by c o n v e n t i o n a l s t a n d a r d s . 1 4 0 There are no easy answers. Once conduct becomes the s u b j e c t of c r i m i n a l s a n c t i o n , however, c e r t a i n c o n s i d e r a t i o n s p r e s e n t themselves. F i r s t , c i t i z e n s must be made aware of i t s i l l e g a l n a t ure and second, the s t a t e must be a b l e t o p u n i s h those who choose t o partake i n such conduct. In the pages which f o l l o w , both t h e s e i s s u e s are e x p l o r e d . The f i r s t i s s u e i n v i t e s c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the p r i n c i p l e of l e g a l i t y , termed by a t l e a s t one w r i t e r as "the keystone" of Canadian c r i m i n a l law, the b e l i e f t h a t c r i m i n a l l i a b i l i t y can o n l y 1 - i y Kenny, supra. nt. 135 a t 26. 1 4 0 Jerome H a l l , Law. S o c i a l Science and C r i m i n a l Theory ( L i t t l e t o n , Colo.: Rothman, 1982) a t 203. H a l l notes the debate which continued f o r some time between H.L.A. Hart and L o r d D e v l i n over the proper a t t r i b u t i o n of ' v i c t i m l e s s 1 behaviour, i n c l u d i n g p r o s t i t u t i o n , drug a d d i c t i o n and v a r i o u s s e x u a l p r a c t i c e s ( i b i d , a t 2 08). The H a r t / D e v l i n debate r e s u l t e d from the Wolfenden Report, which recommended a d e c r i m i n a l i z a t i o n of c e r t a i n p r i v a t e a c t s . D e v l i n argued a g a i n s t the recommendations, b e l i e v i n g t h a t c r i m i n a l law s h o u l d r e f l e c t p u b l i c standards of m o r a l i t y . Hart, on the o t h e r hand, d i v o r c e d m o r a l i t y from c r i m i n a l law, a r g u i n g i n favour of an " o b j e c t i v e s o c i a l harm" t e s t (Alan W. Mewett and M o r r i s Manning, C r i m i n a l Law (Toronto: Butterworth, 1985) a t 12). 34 flow from a d e f i n e d o f f e n c e . 1 4 1 I n t e g r a l t o the p r i n c i p l e i s the maxim nullum crimen s i n e lege. N u l l a poena s i n e l e g e , which i s t o say " t h e r e must be no crime or punishment except i n accordance with f i x e d , predetermined law." 1 4 2 G l a n v i l l e W i l l i a m s e x p l a i n s : Nullum crimen i s an i n j u n c t i o n t o the l e g i s l a t u r e not t o draw i t s s t a t u t e s i n such broad terms t h a t almost anybody can be brought w i t h i n them at the whim of the p r o s e c u t i n g a u t h o r i t y and the judge. 1 4 3 In h i s famous 1968 t r e a t i s e on the l i m i t s of c r i m i n a l law, H e r b e r t Packer c o n s i d e r e d the p r i n c i p l e of l e g a l i t y a t l e n g t h . 1 4 4 In h i s view, the p r i n c i p l e , i n i t s o r i g i n a l form, was l i t t l e more than an anachronism. No longer was c r i m i n a l conduct an u n w r i t t e n , amorphous c o l l e c t i o n of customary laws which r e q u i r e d the s u b s t a n t i v e o v e r s i g h t which the p r i n c i p l e once p r o v i d e d . Instead, he observed t h a t the p r i n c i p l e ' s "contemporary v i t a l i t y " arose from the a p p l i c a t i o n of v a r i o u s d o c t r i n e s which served t o prevent the a r b i t r a r y a p p l i c a t i o n of c r i m i n a l laws and other abuses by persons and i n s t i t u t i o n s charged with a d m i n i s t e r i n g p u b l i c laws. In h i s o p i n i o n , "the void-for-vagueness d o c t r i n e and the d o c t r i n e r e q u i r i n g the s t r i c t c o n s t r u c t i o n of penal s t a t u t e s " amply demonstrate t h i s modern a p p l i c a t i o n of the p r i n c i p l e . Not 1 4 1 Law Reform Commission of Canada, C r i m i n a l Law - The  General P a r t : L i a b i l i t y and Defences. Working Paper No. 29 (Ottawa: Supply and S e r v i c e s Canada, 1982) a t 12. 1 4 2 G l a n v i l l e W i l l i a m s . C r i m i n a l Law - The General P a r t . 2nd ed. (London: Stevens and Sons, 1961) a t 575. 1 4 3 I b i d , a t 578. 1 4 4 Herbert Packer, The L i m i t s of the C r i m i n a l S a n c t i o n ( S t a n f o r d : S t a n f o r d Univ. Press, 1968) a t 79-102. 35 s u r p r i s i n g l y , both d o c t r i n e s are p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l e v a n t t o the proceeds of crime amendments. To confuse the c r i m i n a l and c i v i l p r o c e s s e s i s t o i n v i t e abuse. Once s o c i e t y agrees t h a t c e r t a i n conduct i s c r i m i n a l , a panoply of p r o t e c t i o n s , common law, s t a t u t o r y and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a p p l y . To import r u l e s of evidence from the c i v i l sphere p o t e n t i a l l y abrogates those p r o t e c t i o n s , based as they are on a q u i t e d i f f e r e n t presumptive f o o t i n g . Hogarth d e s c r i b e s t h e problem i n the f o l l o w i n g terms: C i v i l s u i t s are designed t o secure p r i v a t e r i g h t s and when they are v i o l a t e d , t o compensate. The c r i m i n a l law i s designed t o p r o t e c t s o c i e t y as a whole through the a p p l i c a t i o n of punishment a g a i n s t those,who knowingly v i o l a t e i t s r u l e s . The d i f f e r e n t procedures used r e f l e c t both d i f f e r e n c e s i n purpose and d i f f e r e n c e s i n consequences. Given the overwhelming power of the S t a t e and the p u n i t i v e consequences t o the accused upon c o n v i c t i o n , the r u l e s g o v e r n i n g the c r i m i n a l process are more p r o s c r i b e d and d e f i n e d more p r e c i s e l y . 4 5 The c r i m i n a l law i s r e p l e t e w i t h presumptions and burdens intended t o ensure the e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system a t the l e a s t p o s s i b l e expense t o i n d i v i d u a l l i b e r t i e s . Many are of such l o n g - s t a n d i n g t h a t they can r i g h t f u l l y be termed norms, the a b r o g a t i o n of which i s not e a s i l y countenanced. The presumption of innocence, s i n c e i t s development i n England d u r i n g the l a t e e i g h t e e n t h century, i s v i r t u a l l y s a c r o s a n c t i n c r i m i n a l law, the v e r y bedrock of the c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system. Innocence i s assumed p r i o r t o a f i n d i n g of g u i l t . I n t e g r a l t o the presumption of innocence i s a burden of proof 4 5 Hogarth, supra. nt. 90. which ensures t h a t the presumption i s not rendered nugatory. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt i s the high t h r e s h o l d which the common law r e q u i r e s i n order t o s u s t a i n a c r i m i n a l c o n v i c t i o n . 1 4 6 G l a n v i l l e W i l l i a m s notes t h a t " [ t ] h e phrase i s v i r t u a l l y i n d e f i n a b l e " 1 4 7 and recommends t h a t judges not attempt a d e f i n i t i o n when i n s t r u c t i n g j u r i e s . Those who have attempted are apt t o use the phraseology of "moral c e r t a i n t y , an a b i d i n g c o n v i c t i o n . " 1 4 8 The burden r e s t i n g upon the Crown must be s a t i s f i e d on a l l elements of an o f f e n c e . 1 4 9 As noted by the House of Lords i n Woolminqton. the presumption of innocence and p r o o f beyond a r e a s o n a b l e doubt are fundamental t o E n g l i s h c r i m i n a l law, save and except f o r the defence of i n s a n i t y and s t a t u t o r y e x c e p t i o n s . 1 5 0 S i m i l a r l y , c i v i l procedures cannot be invoked i n a i d of the c r i m i n a l p r o c e s s . In the absence of a presumption of innocence, 1 4 6 Woolminqton v. D i r e c t o r of P u b l i c P r o s e c u t i o n s [1935] A.C. 462 a t 481 (H.L.) 1 4 7 G l a n v i l l e W i l l i a m s , Textbook of C r i m i n a l Law. 2nd ed., (London: Stevens, 1983) a t 43. 1 4 8 James B. Fay, " B a s i c P r i n c i p l e s of C r i m i n a l Law," i n J o e l E. Pink and David P e r r i e r , From CRIME t o PUNISHMENT - An  I n t r o d u c t i o n t o the C r i m i n a l Law System (Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1988) a t 30. Numerous Canadian cases have c o n s i d e r e d the meaning of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. S i g n i f i c a n t among these are the f o l l o w i n g : R. v. Haves [1923] 1 D.L.R. 459, 38 C.C.C. 348 ( A l t a . C.A.); R. v. Gordon (1983) 4 C.C.C. (3d) 492 (Ont. C.A.); Nadeau v. R. [1984] 2 S.C.R. 570; R. v. Lachance (1962) 39 C R . 127 (Ont. C.A.); and R. v. Moreau (1986) 51 C R . (3d) 209 (Ont. C.A.). 1 4 9 R. v. Bourque [1969] 4 C.C.C. 358 (B.C.C.A.). 1 5 0 Subject, i n Canada, t o the Cha r t e r . 37 the r u l e s of evidence and procedure which apply t o c i v i l matters are o f f e n s i v e t o c r i m i n a l law. On a d i f f e r e n t plane, however e q u a l l y unique t o c r i m i n a l law, i s the concept of sentencing. Most modern c r i m i n o l o g i s t s would agree w i t h Kenny t h a t the primary f u n c t i o n of c r i m i n a l law i s the p r e v e n t i o n of c r i m e . 1 5 1 Thus the occurrence of crime r e p r e s e n t s the i n a b i l i t y of law enforcement and the p u b l i c t o r e s t r a i n persons from t r a n s g r e s s i n g s o c i a l l y accepted norms of behaviour. Once c a l l e d t o account, s o c i e t y d e a l s with such persons through the s e n t e n c i n g process wherein a q u a r t e t of g e n e r a l l y accepted g o a l s or p r i n c i p l e s apply: deterrence (general and s p e c i f i c ) , r e h a b i l i t a t i o n , r e t r i b u t i o n and i n c a p a c i t a t i o n . 1 5 2 The Code does not a s s i g n " r e l a t i v e weight and p r i o r i t y " t o the p r i n c i p l e s or f a c t o r s c o n s i d e r e d r e l e v a n t a t s e n t e n c i n g , 1 5 3 d e s p i t e the widespread b e l i e f t h a t c e r t a i n are of g r e a t e r importance than o t h e r s . Although Parliament cannot be expected t o a s s e s s w i t h e x a c t i t u d e a l l r e l e v a n t i s s u e s on s e n t e n c i n g , the complete absence of any guide other than maximum and minimum p e n a l t i e s i s of i n t e r e s t . U l t i m a t e l y i t i s the judge who must ensure f a i r n e s s and e q u i t y i n the u n s c i e n t i f i c d e l i n e a t i o n of an 1 3 1 Kenny, supra. nt. 135 a t 32. 1 5 2 D i f f e r e n t names are o c c a s i o n a l l y used t o d e s c r i b e these p r i n c i p l e s . 1 5 3 Dept. of J u s t i c e , Sentencing (Ottawa: Supply and S e r v i c e s Canada, 1984) a t 21. The Code does e n v i s i o n i n c r e a s e d sentences f o r second and subsequent o f f e n c e s of the same type (see, f o r example, s. 255 as i t r e l a t e s t o s e n t e n c i n g f o r impaired d r i v i n g o f f e n c e s ) . 38 a p p r o p r i a t e p e n a l t y . 1 5 4 The r a t i o n a l e f o r such a •system' was o u t l i n e d i n a r e c e n t white paper on sen t e n c i n g : The b a s i s f o r [the wide d i s c r e t i o n ] has been the b e l i e f t h a t P a r l i a m e n t cannot p o s s i b l y f o r e s e e and make e x p l i c i t s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n f o r the i n f i n i t e v a r i e t y of circumstances and cases t h a t come bef o r e the c o u r t s f o r s e n t e n c i n g . . . . 1 5 5 Punishment of an of f e n d e r i s of secondary importance t o the aims of the proceeds of crime l e g i s l a t i o n . N e u t r a l i z i n g the c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n i s paramount. The e f f e c t o f t h i s d e v i a t i o n from the norm i s i n t e r e s t i n g f o r i t serves t o accentuate a d i s t i n c t i o n o f t e n drawn between d i f f e r e n t models of the c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system. C r i m i n o l o g i s t s are prone t o dichotomize crime c o n t r o l i n i t i a t i v e s 1 5 6 from what are c o n s i d e r e d t h e i r p o l a r o p p o s i t e s , 1 5 4 The o n l y check on the wide d i s c r e t i o n a f f o r d e d judges i s p r o v i d e d by the appeal mechanism. I f a sentence i s not appealed, as most are not, i t w i l l never be reviewed. A former c h i e f j u s t i c e of B r i t i s h Columbia e s t i m a t e d t h a t l e s s than one per cent of p r o v i n c i a l c o u r t d e c i s i o n s a re reviewed by the Court of Appeal i n t h a t p r o v i n c e (John L. F a r r i s , " Sentencing," i n (1975-76) 18 Crim. L. 0. 421 a t 422). See g e n e r a l l y , John Hogarth, Sentencing as a Human  Process (Toronto: Univ. of Toronto Press, 1971), f o r an examination of j u d i c i a l a t t i t u d e s t o s e n t e n c i n g , s p e c i f i c a l l y , chapter 1 f o r a d i s c u s s i o n of the g o a l s and pr o c e s s e s of sentencing. 1 5 5 Hogarth, supra. n t. 145 a t 4. Hogarth expressed c a u t i o u s concern over the d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered when the emphasis of sen t e n c i n g becomes the f i x i n g of punishment which w i l l c o n t r o l f u t u r e behaviour of an i n d i v i d u a l o r community r a t h e r than sentencing which i s r e t r o s p e c t i v e , a t t e mpting t o f i t the punishment t o the o f f e n c e ( i b i d , a t 4) . 1 5 6 James I n v e r a r i t y notes t h a t "the u n d e r l y i n g assumption of the crime c o n t r o l model i s t h a t s t a t e power i s not i n h e r e n t l y e v i l " (James M. I n v e r a r i t y , Pat Lauderdale and B a r r y C. F e l d , Law and S o c i e t y - S o c i o l o g i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e s on C r i m i n a l Law (Boston: L i t t l e , Brown, 1983) a t 248). 39 those which emphasize due p r o c e s s . 1 5 7 They suggest t h a t the former permit more e f f e c t i v e law enforcement a t the expense of the l a t t e r , which seek t o r e s t r a i n the a c t i o n s of p o l i c e and o t h e r s engaged i n law enforcement. 1 5 8 The former r e l y h e a v i l y on the e f f e c t of punishment on both an o f f e n d e r and the community at l a r g e . The l a t t e r i n c l u d e both s u b s t a n t i v e and p r o c e d u r a l p r o t e c t i o n s . I n e v i t a b l y , l e g i s l a t i v e i n i t i a t i v e s r e f l e c t a b a l a n c i n g of both the crime c o n t r o l and the due process models. A s i m i l a r r e s u l t o c c u r s i n the c o u r t s as judges seek t o maximize the c o n t r o l of crime a t the l e a s t p o s s i b l e s a c r i f i c e t o l i b e r t y . The long r e a c h of the proceeds of crime amendments demands s t r o n g counterweights t o prevent the undue i n f r i n g e m e n t of c i v i l l i b e r t i e s . I t remains t o be seen, however, whether Par l i a m e n t p r o v i d e d s u f f i c i e n t t o o l s i n the l e g i s l a t i o n t o accomplish t h i s h i g h o b j e c t i v e . The amendments c a l l i n t o q u e s t i o n many of the norms and t r a d i t i o n s of c r i m i n a l law. In the overview of the amendments which f o l l o w s i n Chapter Two, those aspects which o f f e r the 1 5 7 I n v e r a r i t y notes t h a t t h i s model "draws a sharp d i s t i n c t i o n between l e g a l and f a c t u a l g u i l t , between i n f o r m a t i o n and evidence" ( i b i d , a t 247). 1 5 8 See g e n e r a l l y Herbert Packer, "Two Models of the C r i m i n a l P r o c e s s " (1964) 113 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1 and The L i m i t s  of the C r i m i n a l Sanction, supra. nt. 144. Some c r i t i c i z e Packer's dichotomy as too s i m p l i s t i c and o f f e r Weber's t y p o l o g y of decision-making as an a l t e r n a t i v e . Weber sought t o a nalyze the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n the l e g a l system by a n a l y z i n g the prevalence of the elements of r a t i o n a l i t y and f o r m a l i t y ( I n v e r a r i t y , supra. nt. 156 a t ch. 3 and 249-51). 40 g r e a t e s t c h a l l e n g e are d i s c u s s e d a t l e n g t h and a c o u n t e r p o i n t i s drawn t o Canada's p r e - e x i s t i n g c r i m i n a l law. 41 CHAPTER 2 THE AMENDMENTS AND THE CODE The purpose of t h i s t h e s i s i s not t o attempt a comprehensive a n a l y s i s of a l l aspects of the proceeds of crime amendments, many of which i n v i t e both e x t e n s i v e s c r u t i n y and c o n s i d e r a b l e argument, academic and j u d i c i a l . N evertheless, an a p p r e c i a t i o n of the f u l l b r e adth and exte n t of the amendments i s fundamental t o an informed d i s c u s s i o n of t h e i r impact on the t r a d i t i o n a l norms of Canadian c r i m i n a l law. T h i s Chapter overviews the l e g i s l a t i v e scheme which u n d e r l i e s the amendments, emphasizing those a s p e c t s which appear t o c o n t r a d i c t these norms. In so doing, the p r e - e x i s t i n g s t a t e of c r i m i n a l law i n Canada i s juxtaposed as a c o u n t e r p o i n t t o the new p r o v i s i o n s . The c o n f i s c a t i o n scheme envisaged by the amendments i s premised on the r e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of a number of e x i s t i n g C r i m i n a l  Code o f f e n c e s and the i n c l u s i o n of a new 'l a u n d e r i n g ' o f f e n c e as " e n t e r p r i s e crimes." S i m i l a r l y , a number of s e r i o u s drug o f f e n c e s are l a b e l l e d as designated drug o f f e n c e s and are s u b j e c t t o the d i s c i p l i n e of the new scheme. The framers of the l e g i s l a t i o n presumably intended t o i s o l a t e those o f f e n c e s which o c c a s i o n e d a s t r o n g p o t e n t i a l f o r p r o f i t and which i n e x o r a b l y make crime a t t r a c t i v e . Once c l a s s i f i e d as e i t h e r an e n t e r p r i s e crime or a d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e , v a r i o u s e x t r a o r d i n a r y i n v e s t i g a t i v e methods and sen t e n c i n g o p t i o n s become a v a i l a b l e . Among these are 42 c e r t a i n i n n o v a t i v e f e a t u r e s which arguably t r a n s p o s e a s p e c t s of c i v i l law i n t o the C r i m i n a l Code. By u s i n g the e x i s t i n g s t r u c t u r a l framework of the Code, the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l Act and the Food and Drugs Act, the amendments f o l l o w a p a t t e r n e s t a b l i s h e d by the e l e c t r o n i c eavesdropping amendments of 1973-74, 1 t h a t being t o c a t e g o r i z e o f f e n c e s and a c c o r d them s p e c i a l a t t r i b u t e s . The f o l l o w i n g d i s c u s s i o n c e n t e r s upon the amendments contained w i t h i n B i l l C-61 which r e l a t e t o the C r i m i n a l Code. Those t o the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l Act and the Food and  Drugs A c t e s s e n t i a l l y mimic the Code amendments and are the s u b j e c t of a d j o i n i n g notes. ENTERPRISE CRIME AND DESIGNATED DRUG OFFENCES E n t e r p r i s e crimes and designated drug o f f e n c e s are not o f f e n c e s per se but c a t e g o r i e s of o f f e n c e s . 2 Without s p e c i f i c d e f i n i t i o n , one i s l e f t t o s p e c u l a t e on the intended meaning of 1 The P r o t e c t i o n of P r i v a c y Act, S.C. 1973-74, c. 50, i n f o r c e on June 30, 1974 and i n c o r p o r a t e d i n the C r i m i n a l Code as P a r t VI. In t h i s paper, they are o c c a s i o n a l l y r e f e r r e d t o as the 'wiretap* amendments, a l l o w i n g t h a t t h e i r frame of r e f e r e n c e a l s o i n c l u d e s e l e c t r o n i c eavesdropping accomplished by o t h e r means. 2 In t h i s t h e s i s , r e f e r e n c e t o ' e n t e r p r i s e crimes' and • e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e s ' i s intended t o a l s o i n c l u d e d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e s , except where i n d i c a t e d . By o p e r a t i o n of s. 19.3 of the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t , and s e c t i o n s 44.4, 50.1 and 51 of the Food and Drugs Act, the newly c r e a t e d search, r e s t r a i n t and f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s of P a r t XII.2 apply mutatis mutandis t o the d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e s . 43 ' e n t e r p r i s e crimes' and the r a t i o n a l e f o r not o p t i n g f o r a n e u t r a l term, f o r example, 'designated c r i m i n a l o f f e n c e s , ' as i n the case of drug o f f e n c e s . C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t the avowed purpose of the amendments i s t o n e u t r a l i z e l a r g e - s c a l e drug t r a f f i c k i n g and money l a u n d e r i n g o p e r a t i o n s , one might assume t h a t the term i s intended t o i n c l u d e those o f f e n c e s committed by o r g a n i z e d drug s y n d i c a t e s . I t i s c u r i o u s , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t among the twenty-four p r e d i c a t e e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e s i n s. 462.3 are many which may, but g e n e r a l l y are not connected with such a c t i v i t y ; f o r i example, murder, t h e f t , robbery, f o r g e r y , u t t e r i n g , f r a u d and arson. D e s p i t e the p o l i t i c a l r h e t o r i c , e n t e r p r i s e crimes are intended t o i n c l u d e those i l l e g a l forms of behaviour which may bd u t i l i z e d i i by o r g a n i z e d crime, i n the broadest sense of t h a t term, not simply by drug t r a f f i c k e r s and money la u n d e r e r s . The l a c k i of c l e a r purpose i s compounded when one c o n s i d e r s P a t r i c i a j Donald's o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t although the p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e s are " g e n e r a l l y 3 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.3. The complete l i s t of o f f e n c e s i n s. 462.3(a) and s. 463(b) are as f o l l o w s : s. 119 ( b r i b e r y of j u d i c i a l o f f i c e r s , e t c . ) , s. 120 ( b r i b e r y of o f f i c e r s ) , s. 121 ( f r a u d s upon the government), s. 122 (breach of t r u s t by p u b l i c o f f i c e r ) , s. 163 ( c o r r u p t i n g m o r a l s ) , s. 201(1) (keeping gaming or b e t t i n g house) , s. 202 (betting,! p o o l -s e l l i n g , book-making, e t c . ) , s. 210 (Keeping common bawdy-house), s. 212 ( p r o c u r i n g ) , s. 235 (punishment f o r murder), s. 334 (punishment f o r t h e f t ) , s. 344 (punishment f o r r o b b e r y ) , s. 346 ( e x t o r t i o n ) , s. 367 (punishment f o r f o r g e r y ) , s. 368 ( u t t e r i n g forged document), s. 380 ( f r a u d ) , s. 382 ( f r a u d u l e n t m anipulation of s t o c k exchange t r a n s a c t i o n s ) , s. 426 ( s e c r e t commissions) , s. 433 ( a r s o n ) , s. 449 (making c o u n t e r f e i t money), s. 450 ( p o s s e s s i o n , e t c . , of c o u n t e r f e i t money), s. 452 ( u t t e r i n g , e t c . , c o u n t e r f e i t money), s. 462.31 (l a u n d e r i n g proceeds of crime) and s. 354 ( p o s s e s s i o n of p r o p e r t y obtained by c r i m e ) . 44 e c o n o m i c a l l y motivated," c e r t a i n o f f e n c e s of a s i m i l a r c h a r a c t e r are o m i t t e d ; 4 f o r example, charging a c r i m i n a l r a t e of i n t e r e s t , 5 break and e n t e r , 6 m a i l f r a u d 7 and p u b l i s h i n g a f a l s e p r o s p e c t u s . 8 I n c l u d e d among the p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e s i s s. 354, p o s s e s s i o n of p r o p e r t y o b t a i n e d by crime, the focus of e a r l i e r attempts t o use t h e Code t o capture the proceeds of crime. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , however, i t i s not every o f f e n c e a g a i n s t s. 354 which q u a l i f i e s , r a t h e r o n l y those i n which the "property, t h i n g or proceeds" was o b t a i n e d by or d e r i v e d , not from the commission of any i n d i c t a b l e o f f e n c e as i s n o r m a l l y the case, but by the commission of another p r e d i c a t e e n t e r p r i s e crime or designated drug o f f e n c e . 9 In e f f e c t , s. 462.3 4 The E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Working Group recommended t h a t the p r e d i c a t e e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e s be drawn from those f o r which a wiretap a u t h o r i z a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e (Dept. of J u s t i c e , E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Report. Ottawa, 10 June 1983) a t 181. 5 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 305.1 [now 347]. Donald notes t h a t s. 3 05.1 i s , however, a p r e d i c a t e wiretap o f f e n c e (Minutes of  Meeting. C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e S e c t i o n . Vancouver, unpub., 18 Jan. 1989 a t 4) . The p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e s i n P a r t VI are c e r t a i n l y g r e a t e r i n number than i n the d e f i n i t i o n of an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e , the d i f f e r e n c e g e n e r a l l y e x p l a i n a b l e by the emphasis i n the l a t t e r on economic crime. The absence of s. 3 05.1 i s an unexplained e x c e p t i o n . 6 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 306 [now s.348]. 7 I b i d , s. 339 [now s. 381]. 8 I b i d . , s. 358 [now s. 400]. Supra, nt. 5 a t 4. 9 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.3, " e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e , " (b) . The d e f i n i t i o n a l s o i n c l u d e s "an a c t or o m i s s i o n anywhere t h a t , i f i t had o c c u r r e d i n Canada, would have c o n s t i t u t e d " an e n t e r p r i s e crime or a designated drug o f f e n c e . 45 l i m i t s the breadth of s. 354 f o r purposes of P a r t X I I . 2 . 1 0 Designated drug o f f e n c e s 1 1 i n c l u d e t r a f f i c k i n g or p o s s e s s i o n f o r t h a t purpose of c o n t r o l l e d drugs, 1 2 r e s t r i c t e d d r u g s 1 3 and n a r c o t i c s ; 1 4 importing and e x p o r t i n g a n a r c o t i c ; 1 5 c u l t i v a t i n g opium poppy or marihuana; 1 6 p o s s e s s i o n of p r o p e r t y o b t a i n e d by the f o r e g o i n g o f f e n c e s 1 7 and l a u n d e r i n g t h e i r p r o c e e d s . 1 8 Those inchoate a c t s which c o n s t i t u t e a c o n s p i r a c y , 1 9 attempt 2 0 or c o u n s e l l i n g , 2 1 as w e l l as a c c e s s o r i e s a f t e r the f a c t , 2 2 i f a c t i n g i n f u r t h e r a n c e of or i n r e l a t i o n t o a p r e d i c a t e -1 0 A l a n Gold c r i t i c i z e s the r e f e r e n c e t o e n t e r p r i s e crime and d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e s i n the r e s t r i c t e d d e f i n i t i o n of s. 354. He notes the c i r c u l a r i t y of d e f i n i t i o n which r e s u l t s , adding t h a t i t " e x e m p l i f i e s the l a c k of c r a f t s m a n s h i p t h a t went i n t o the d r a f t i n g of the l e g i s l a t i o n " (Alan D. Gold, Proceeds of Crime - A Manual w i t h Commentary  on B i l l C-61 (Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989) a t 21). 11 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.3, 1 2 Food and Drugs Act, s. 39. 1 3 I b i d . , s. 48. 1 4 N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l Act, s. 4. 1 5 I b i d . , s. 5. 1 6 I b i d . , s. 6. 17 I b i d , s. 19.1; Food and Drugs Act, s. 44.2 and s. 50.2. 1 8 N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l Act, s. 19.2; Food and Drugs Act, s. 44.3 and s. 50.3. 1 9 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 465. 20 I b i d , s. 24. 2 1 I b i d . , s. 22. 2 2 I b i d . , s. 23. 46 o f f e n c e , are i n c l u d e d w i t h i n the d e f i n i t i o n of an e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e . 2 3 As w e l l , by o p e r a t i o n of s. 21 of the Code. a person who a i d s or abets the commission of a p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e a t t r a c t s a degree of c u l p a b i l i t y equal t o t h a t of the a c t u a l p e r p e t r a t o r . Although the amendments c l a s s i f y o f f e n c e s , the newly-created u m b r e l l a c a t e g o r i e s do not c o n s t i t u t e o f f e n c e s i n and of themselves. In t h i s regard, the approach taken by the d r a f t e r s * i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of the RICO s t a t u t e s , which c r i m i n a l i z e a p a t t e r n of r a c k e t e e r i n g represented by the commission of two or more p r e d i c a t e f e d e r a l or s t a t e o f f e n c e s . However, i t i s s i m i l a r t o the B r i t i s h and A u s t r a l i a n approaches. LAUNDERING PROCEEDS OF CRIME The breadth of the amendments i s e x e m p l i f i e d by the i n c l u s i o n of s. 462.31, the o f f e n c e of l a u n d e r i n g proceeds of c r i m e . 2 4 2 3 I b i d . . s. 462.3, " e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e , " (c) . MacFarlane observes t h a t the i n c l u s i o n of i n c h o a t e o f f e n c e s remedies the " d i s a b i l i t y " noted i n R. v. Cuthbertson. [1981] A.C. 470 (H.L.). (Bruce MacFarlane, "Legal V e h i c l e s Leading t o F o r f e i t u r e Under P a r t X . l of the C r i m i n a l Code," unpub. paper, NCPC a t 1). Cuthbertson had determined t h a t e x i s t i n g B r i t i s h law d i d not permit the f o r f e i t u r e of proceeds of a c o n s p i r a c y , which the Court found was not an o f f e n c e f o r purposes of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 (28 S t a t u t e s 500). 2 4 H e r e a f t e r r e f e r r e d t o as 'laundering.* The o f f e n c e i s a l s o a p r e d i c a t e ' e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e ' (s. 462.3). S i m i l a r o f f e n c e s are c r e a t e d i n the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t (s. 19.2) and the Food and Drugs Act (s. 43.3 ( c o n t r o l l e d drugs) and s. 50.3 ( r e s t r i c t e d d r u g s ) ) , presumably i n o r d e r t o 47 Being one of two new Code o f f e n c e s , 5 and c e r t a i n l y the most important c r e a t e d by the l e g i s l a t i o n , the s e c t i o n i n t r o d u c e s t o Canada a concept which, i n the United S t a t e s forms the s u b j e c t matter of an e n t i r e s t a t u t e . 2 6 I t v a s t l y i n c r e a s e s the reach of c r i m i n a l c o n f i s c a t i o n t o i n c l u d e a broad range of conduct, not p r e v i o u s l y c o n s i d e r e d c r i m i n a l . 2 7 The d e f i n i t i o n of l a u n d e r i n g i s a c o n v o l u t e d 118 word sentence 2 8 which i n c l u d e s w i t h i n i t s grasp v i r t u a l l y a l l persons who d e a l with "any p r o p e r t y or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y . . . obtained or d e r i v e d d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y as a f a c i l i t a t e p r o s e c u t i o n s by e i t h e r the f e d e r a l or p r o v i n c i a l Crown. The E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Group recommended c r e a t i o n of a l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e (supra. nt. 4 a t 177). 2 5 The o t h e r newly c r e a t e d o f f e n c e i s the breach o f , or non-compliance w i t h a r e s t r a i n t order, s. 462.33(11). 2 6 The Money Laundering C o n t r o l Act 1986. S u b t i t l e H of T i t l e I of the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986. P.L. 99-570 (27 Oct. 1986), as amended by P.L. 100-690 (18 Nov. 1988). 2 7 Even one of the framers of the l e g i s l a t i o n , R i c h a r d G. Mosley, notes t h a t " [ t ] h e conduct encompassed by the o f f e n c e i s d e s c r i b e d i n very broad terms t o cover v i r t u a l l y any d e a l i n g w i t h the p r o p e r t y . " He adds t h a t l i a b i l i t y i s l i m i t e d by the mens rea requirements ("Seizing the Proceeds of Crime: The O r i g i n s and Main Features of Canada's C r i m i n a l F o r f e i t u r e L e g i s l a t i o n , " unpub. paper, NCPC a t 16). 2 8 A l a n Gold suggests t h a t the o f f e n c e c o u l d j u s t as c o r r e c t l y be worded as f o l l o w s : Every one commits an o f f e n c e who d e a l s , i n any manner and by any means, with proceeds of crime (or p r o p e r t y which i s p a r t l y such) w i t h i n Canada, knowing t h a t the p r o p e r t y was proceeds of crime w i t h i n Canada, wi t h i n t e n t t o conceal or convert t h a t p r o p e r t y or those proceeds (supra, nt. 10 a t 28) . 48 r e s u l t o f " an e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e . 9 A d u a l procedure o f f e n c e , i t r e q u i r e s the s p e c i f i c i n t e n t " t o c o n c e a l or c o n v e r t " t a i n t e d p r o p e r t y or proceeds i n a d d i t i o n t o knowledge of t h e i r i l l e g a l o r i g i n . George Goyer observes t h a t the s p e c i f i c i n t e n t of c o n v e r t i n g p r o p e r t y or proceeds: ...seems t o r e l a t e back t o a l l of the manners i n which the p r o p e r t y might be d e a l t with, d i s p o s e d of, e t c . I f an i n d i v i d u a l had knowledge t h a t p r o p e r t y or proceeds were o b t a i n e d as a r e s u l t of crime, any d e a l i n g s would seem t o come w i t h i n t h i s broad d e f i n i t i o n as long as those d e a l i n g s r e s u l t e d i n e i t h e r the concealment or c o n v e r s i o n of the p r o p e r t y or proceeds. 3 0 In a d d i t i o n , the knowledge requirements may w e l l be s a t i s f i e d by an 2 9 S e c t i o n 462.31, i n i t s e n t i r e t y , reads as f o l l o w s : (1) Every one commits an o f f e n c e who uses, t r a n s f e r s the p o s s e s s i o n of, sends or d e l i v e r s t o any person or p l a c e , t r a n s p o r t s , t r a n s m i t s , a l t e r s , d i s p o s e s of or otherwise d e a l s with, i n any manner and by any means, any p r o p e r t y or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y with i n t e n t t o c o n c e a l or c o n v e r t t h a t p r o p e r t y or those proceeds and knowing t h a t a l l or a p a r t of t h a t p r o p e r t y or of those proceeds was o b t a i n e d or d e r i v e d d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y as a r e s u l t of (a) the commission i n Canada of an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e or a d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e ; or (b) an a c t or omission anywhere t h a t , i f i t had o c c u r r e d i n Canada, would have c o n s t i t u t e d an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e or a d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e . (2) Every one who commits an o f f e n c e under s u b s e c t i o n (1) (a) i s g u i l t y of an i n d i c t a b l e o f f e n c e and i s l i a b l e t o imprisonment f o r a term not exceeding t e n y e a r s ; or (b) i s g u i l t y of an o f f e n c e p u n i s h a b l e on summary c o n v i c t i o n . 3 0 Proceeds of Crime (Vancouver: C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l E d u c a t i o n S o c i e t y of B.C., 1990) a t 3.1.03. 49 accused person choosing t o remain w i l f u l l y b l i n d t o the source of funds, "knowledge presumed" as opposed t o "knowledge c e r t a i n . " 3 1 C u r i o u s l y , although the term i s d e f i n e d i n s. 462.3, the o f f e n c e does not i n c l u d e the words "proceeds of crime." The omission, presumably i n t e n t i o n a l , i s not e a s i l y e x p l a i n e d . A l a n Gold i d e n t i f i e s t h r e e d i f f e r e n c e s between the s u b j e c t matter of the l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e and the d e f i n i t i o n f o r proceeds of crime. F i r s t l y , he r e f e r s t o the " i n s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e " whereby the former uses the words "property or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y , " w h i l e the l a t t e r r e f e r s t o "property, b e n e f i t or advantage." 3 2 He adds t h a t the d e f i n i t i o n f o r 'proceeds of crime' does not use the word 'proceeds,• while the l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e does, c i t i n g t h i s as 3 1 Kenneth Young, "Proceeds of Crime," i n The Drug Case (Vancouver: C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l Education S o c i e t y of B.C., Mar. 1990) a t 2.1.04. Young (at 2.1.05) quotes from the S.C.C. d e c i s i o n i n R. v. Sansregret (1985) 45 C R . (3d) 193: . . . w i l l f u l b l i n d n e s s a r i s e s where a person who has become aware of the need f o r some i n q u i r y d e c l i n e s t o make the i n q u i r y because he does not wish t o know the t r u t h . He would p r e f e r t o remain i g n o r a n t . The c u l p a b i l i t y ( i n w i l l f u l b l i n d n e s s ) . . . i s j u s t i f i e d by the accused's f a u l t i n d e l i b e r a t e l y f a i l i n g t o i n q u i r e when he knows t h a t t h e r e i s reason f o r i n q u i r y . The Law S o c i e t y of B r i t i s h Columbia i s c l e a r i n i t s warning t o members of the p r o f e s s i o n : ...a lawyer who accepts money or p r o p e r t y from a c l i e n t knowing or being w i l f u l l y [ s i c ] b l i n d t o the f a c t t h a t i t i s the proceeds of crime, may be charged w i t h the o f f e n c e s of p o s s e s s i o n or " l a u n d e r i n g " ("New Proceeds of Crime L e g i s l a t i o n , " [1989] 10 Benchers' B u l l e t i n 2 ) . 3 2 Supra, n t . 10 a t 27. The d i f f e r e n c e may not be as i n s i g n i f i c a n t as he suggests. Can a b e n e f i t or an advantage be laundered? Does "property, b e n e f i t or advantage" i n c l u d e the proceeds of property? 50 "an example of the r a t h e r sloppy d r a f t i n g of the s t a t u t e . " Secondly, he notes t h a t the l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e does not apply t o p r o p e r t y o u t s i d e Canada. T h i r d l y , the o f f e n c e need o n l y apply t o p r o p e r t y or proceeds which are i n p a r t the product of an e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e . 3 3 Gold warns of the i m p l i c a t i o n s of the new o f f e n c e : ...the p r o v i s i o n s . . . a r e expressed i n language so broad t h a t anyone d e a l i n g with any form of p r o p e r t y or proceeds t h e r e o f , from anywhere i n the world, t h a t may be viewed as d e r i v e d from a c t s t h a t would arguably be c r i m i n a l under Canadian law w i t h knowledge or even merely s u s p i c i o n s c o n c e r n i n g these suspect o r i g i n s i s a p o t e n t i a l accused f o r v i o l a t i o n of the p r o v i s i o n s . Accountants, bankers, brokers and lawyers ignore these new p r o v i s i o n s a t t h e i r p e r i l 3 4 . C e r t a i n l y h i s concerns have been m i r r o r e d by the c r i m i n a l defence bar, which expressed c o n s i d e r a b l e dismay a t passage of the l e g i s l a t i o n . Kenneth Young summarizes the view: ...the e x t r a o r d i n a r y sweep of the l e g i s l a t i o n i s such t h a t i t must n e c e s s a r i l y a f f e c t how we, as lawyers, r e l a t e t o our c l i e n t s ; what i n q u i r i e s we make as t o the o r i g i n / s o u r c e of our c l i e n t s [ s i c ] funds and p r o p e r t y ; what t r a n s a c t i o n s we w i l l or w i l l not undertake on b e h a l f of our c l i e n t s ; and how, i n c o n t e x t , we will...come t o handle funds and p r o p e r t y e n t r u s t e d t o us as c o u n s e l . 3 5 Supra, n t . 10 a t 27-8. 3 4 I b i d , a t 2-3. 3 5 Supra. n t . 31 a t 2.1.04. Although the l e g i s l a t i o n p l a c e s the r e t a i n e r s of c r i m i n a l defence counsel i n c o n s i d e r a b l e jeopardy, a much g r e a t e r concern t o the l e g a l p r o f e s s i o n must be the impact of the l e g i s l a t i o n on lawyers' u n d e r t a k i n g s . For example, monies h e l d i n t r u s t pending completion of a r e a l e s t a t e t r a n s a c t i o n may be c a p t u r e d by a r e s t r a i n t o r d e r . The e f f e c t of such a s e i z u r e on a lawyer's u n d e r t a k i n g t o d i s b u r s e funds on c l o s i n g i s u n c l e a r , although somewhat analogous s i t u a t i o n s can be found i n the law r e s p e c t i n g g a r n i s h i n g orders and s e i z u r e s by a s h e r i f f . In B r i t i s h Columbia, the Law S o c i e t y i s a c t i v e l y examining the matter (supra, nt. 31). 51 Although the o f f e n c e has the p o t e n t i a l of c a p t u r i n g many persons and t r a n s a c t i o n s under i t s umbrella, i n p r a c t i c e the m a j o r i t y of l a u n d e r i n g cases w i l l l i k e l y be d e a l t with under s. 354, p o s s e s s i o n of the proceeds of crime. As a p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e when committed i n r e l a t i o n t o e n t e r p r i s e crime or designated drug o f f e n c e s , s. 354 can now form the b a s i s of s p e c i a l search warrant and r e s t r a i n t o r d e r a p p l i c a t i o n s and can g i v e r i s e t o c o n f i s c a t i o n o r d e r s . In cases where an accused i s found i n p o s s e s s i o n of proceeds of crime, i t w i l l c e r t a i n l y be e a s i e r t o prove a s. 354 o f f e n c e than a l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e , the l a t t e r c o n t a i n i n g the complex mens rea component noted above. 3 6 Only i n cases where i n v e s t i g a t o r s seek t o r e t r a c e the flow of laundered money and charge those who took p a r t i n the c l e a n s i n g process w i l l i t be nece s s a r y t o l a y l a u n d e r i n g charges. N e v e r t h e l e s s , the q u e s t i o n must be asked: does the c r i m i n a l i z a t i o n of money l a u n d e r i n g i n s. 462.31 o f f e n d the accepted norms of Canada's c r i m i n a l law? In l i g h t of the d i s c u s s i o n i n Chapter One of t h i s t h e s i s , i t seems c l e a r t h a t P a r l i a m e n t possesses the a b i l i t y t o c r i m i n a l i z e v i r t u a l l y any conduct, f e t t e r e d only by c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n s . 3 7 N e v e r t h e l e s s , i t i s e s s e n t i a l when d r a f t i n g new c r i m i n a l o f f e n c e s t h a t P a r l i a m e n t r e s p e c t the p r i n c i p l e of l e g a l i t y and s p e c i f i c a l l y 3 6 S e c t i o n 354 arguably i n c l u d e s a wider s u b j e c t matter than s. 462.31: "any p r o p e r t y or t h i n g or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y or t h i n g , " versus "any p r o p e r t y or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y . " 3 7 A t o p i c c o n s i d e r e d i n Chapter Three. 52 the maxim, 'nullum crimen. 1 Can i t be s a i d t h a t s. 462.31 s u f f i c i e n t l y d e f i n e s the o f f e n c e of l a u n d e r i n g proceeds of crime t o ensure compliance w i t h t h i s maxim? Or, u t i l i z i n g the t e s t d e s c r i b e d by G l a n v i l l e W i l l i a m s , i s the o f f e n c e drawn i n such broad terms t h a t almost anybody can be brought w i t h i n i t s grasp a t the whim of the Crown or the co u r t ? Gold and Young would ap p a r e n t l y agree w i t h the l a t t e r and a l i t e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n appears t o support t h e i r view. On the o t h e r hand, the complex knowledge requirement needed f o r a c o n v i c t i o n may w e l l o f f s e t what c o u l d otherwise be an o v e r l y i n c l u s i v e d e f i n i t i o n . The j u d i c i a l response t o the quandary w i l l l i k e l y be t o s t r i c t l y c o n s t r u e the o f f e n c e i n such a way t h a t i t s parameters are c l e a r l y d e l i n e a t e d , thereby e n s u r i n g t h a t i t w i l l o n l y c a p t u r e those who possess c l e a r knowledge or are w i l f u l l y b l i n d t o the source of monies over which they e x e r c i s e dominion. A r r i v i n g a t a f a i r meaning w i l l l i k e l y m i t i g a t e the p o t e n t i a l reach of the o f f e n c e and a l l a y the worst f e a r s of many, p a r t i c u l a r l y those i n the defence bar. PROCEEDS OF CRIME Although the o f f e n c e of l a u n d e r i n g does not i n c o r p o r a t e the words 'proceeds of crime,' one cannot i g n o r e the importance 53 a t t a c h e d t o t h a t term, as i t r e c u r s throughout the l e g i s l a t i o n . 3 8 As noted i n the d i s c u s s i o n above, the c l a u s e , "any p r o p e r t y , b e n e f i t or advantage, w i t h i n or o u t s i d e Canada" found i n the d e f i n i t i o n f o r proceeds of crime d i f f e r s markedly from the term "any p r o p e r t y or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y , " c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the o f f e n c e of l a u n d e r i n g . I t i s d i f f i c u l t t o say which i s broader. On one hand, l a u n d e r i n g i s a p p a r e n t l y r e s t r i c t e d t o p r o p e r t y s i t u a t e d w i t h i n Canada, 3 9 w h i l e 'proceeds of c r i m e 1 i n c l u d e s a b e n e f i t or advantage and contemplates no t e r r i t o r i a l r e s t r a i n t . On the other hand, the term "proceeds of any p r o p e r t y " i n the o f f e n c e of l a u n d e r i n g contemplates d e r i v a t i v e p r o p e r t y , something not c o n s i d e r e d i n the d e f i n i t i o n f o r 'proceeds of 3 8 S e c t i o n 4 62.3 of the Code d e f i n e s 'proceeds of crime' as f o l l o w s : ...any p r o p e r t y , b e n e f i t or advantage, w i t h i n or o u t s i d e Canada, ob t a i n e d or d e r i v e d d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y as a r e s u l t of (a) the commission i n Canada of an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e or a d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e , or (b) an a c t or omission anywhere t h a t , i f i t had o c c u r r e d i n Canada, would have c o n s t i t u t e d an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e or a d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e . 3 9 Although the p r o p e r t y , b e n e f i t or advantage must be s i t u a t e i n Canada, i t may have d e r i v e d from an a c t or o m i s s i o n committed elsewhere which, " i f i t had o c c u r r e d i n Canada, would have c o n s t i t u t e d an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e or a d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e . " The absence of a "double c r i m i n a l i t y " t e s t , r e q u i r i n g proof of an o f f e n c e under both Canadian and f o r e i g n law, i s thereby avoided (see supra. n t . 10 a t 21-2 and supra, nt. 23 a t 4). The d e f i n i t i o n s of l a u n d e r i n g proceeds of crime (s. 462.31) and p o s s e s s i o n of the proceeds of crime (s. 354) c o n t a i n a s i m i l a r p r o v i s i o n . 54 c r i m e . 1 0 Making the l e g i s l a t i v e i n t e n t even more ambiguous, the l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e i s termed " l a u n d e r i n g proceeds of crime." Do the words 'proceeds of crime' i n t h i s d e s c r i p t i v e t i t l e n e c e s s a r i l y a t t r a c t t h e i r d e f i n e d meaning? In the u n l i k e l y event t h a t they do, one might i n f e r t h a t the term "property or any proceeds of any p r o p e r t y " should p r o p e r l y read 'property or any proceeds of c r i m e , 1 a f f o r d i n g a g l o b a l l y - i n c l u s i v e d e f i n i t i o n of l a u n d e r i n g i n both the j u r i s d i c t i o n a l and d e f i n i t i o n a l sense. SEARCH, SEIZURE AND RESTRAINT E s s e n t i a l t o the enforcement of the amendments are the p r o v i s i o n s d e a l i n g with the search f o r and r e s t r a i n t of p r o p e r t y . 4 1 A p p l i c a t i o n f o r e i t h e r a s p e c i a l search warrant or a r e s t r a i n t o r d e r may be made i n w r i t i n g by the A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , 4 2 based on w Quaere whether t h e r e can be proceeds of the proceeds of crime? 4 1 Kenneth Young draws a p a r a l l e l between a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r s p e c i a l s e arch warrants and a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r w i r e t a p s . Only p a r t l y i n j e s t , he surmises t h a t most a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r the former w i l l be granted: "by r e f e r e n c e t o the P r o t e c t i o n of  P r i v a c y A ct, what judge has y e t proved t o be ' u n s a t i s f i e d ' by the a f f i d a v i t of a uniformed policeman accompanied by Crown Counsel" (supra. nt. 31 a t 2.1.02). 4 2 References t o the Attorney General are found throughout the l e g i s l a t i o n . Although some observers opine t h a t t h i s may r e q u i r e p e r s o n a l involvement by the A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l , the p r e v a i l i n g view suggests t h a t Crown c o u n s e l can a c t i n h i s or her p l a c e . A review of the amendments i n t h e i r e n t i r e t y lends credence t o a broad i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . For 55 r e a s o n a b l e grounds as deposed i n a Form 1 i n f o r m a t i o n , ex p a r t e or otherwise, t o a s u p e r i o r c o u r t judge. 4 3 The o p e r a t i v e p r o v i s i o n f o r searches, s. 462.32, permits the judge t o a u t h o r i z e a p e r s o n 4 4 t o s e a r c h "any b u i l d i n g , r e c e p t a c l e or p l a c e " f o r "any p r o p e r t y i n r e s p e c t of which an order of f o r f e i t u r e may be made" and " t o s e i z e t h a t p r o p e r t y and any other p r o p e r t y i n r e s p e c t of which t h a t person or peace o f f i c e r b e l i e v e s , on reasonable grounds, t h a t an order of f o r f e i t u r e may be made."45 P r i o r t o i s s u i n g the warrant, the judge must be s a t i s f i e d t h a t r e a s o n a b l e grounds e x i s t t o b e l i e v e both t h a t proceeds of crime w i l l be found w i t h i n the l o c a t i o n t o be searched and t h a t an example, the review p r o v i s i o n s i n s. 462.34 r e f e r i n sub-paragraph (5) t o the h o l d i n g of an i n camera h e a r i n g , without the A t t o r n e y General being present. I t would be absurd t o suggest t h a t Crown counsel c o u l d attend, but not the A t t o r n e y G e n e r a l . I t should a l s o be noted t h a t the d e f i n i t i o n f o r A t t o r n e y General i n s. 2 i n c l u d e s the A t t o r n e y General's " l a w f u l deputy," the l a t t e r term being undefined. 4 3 "Judge" i s d e f i n e d i n s. 462.3, which i n t u r n r e q u i r e s r e f e r e n c e t o s. 2 and s. 552. In B r i t i s h Columbia the word means a member of the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal. B r i a n Purdy notes t h a t i n some j u r i s d i c t i o n s , judges are bei n g s p e c i f i c a l l y designated t o d e a l w i t h a p p l i c a t i o n s under the l e g i s l a t i o n ("Special Search Warrants and R e s t r a i n t Orders," unpub. paper, NCPC a t 1). 4 4 Kenneth Young assumes t h a t the r e f e r e n c e t o "person" opens the door t o i n v e s t i g a t o r s from the M i n i s t r y of N a t i o n a l Revenue (supra. nt. 31 a t 2.1.02). N e v e r t h e l e s s , use of the word 'person' i s c o n s i s t e n t w i t h p r e - e x i s t i n g C r i m i n a l Code search p r o v i s i o n s (see s. 487). 4 5 No r e f e r e n c e i s made t o the search and s e i z u r e o f e i t h e r 'proceeds of p r o p e r t y ' or 'proceeds of crime,' but i n s t e a d t o p r o p e r t y f o r f e i t a b l e under e i t h e r s. 462.37(1) or s. 462.38(2), both of which i n c o r p o r a t e the term 'proceeds of crime.* 56 e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e has been committed i n r e l a t i o n t o those p r o c e e d s . 4 6 The judge may r e q u i r e t h a t n o t i c e and a h e a r i n g be p r o v i d e d t o anyone who, i n the judge's o p i n i o n , appears t o have a v a l i d i n t e r e s t i n the p r o p e r t y . 4 7 " V a l i d i n t e r e s t " i s not d e f i n e d , a l t h o u g h i t presumably i n c l u d e s l e g a l and e q u i t a b l e i n t e r e s t s . 4 8 How the c o u r t w i l l o b t a i n both the names of such persons and a d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e i r i n t e r e s t s i s not d e a l t with, although a t l e a s t one o b s e r v e r suggests t h a t the onus must f a l l upon the a f f i a n t when a p p l y i n g f o r an o r d e r . 4 9 I f , i n the judge's o p i n i o n , p r o v i d i n g n o t i c e o r a f f o r d i n g an o p p o r t u n i t y t o be heard may r e s u l t i n the "disappearance, d i s s i p a t i o n or r e d u c t i o n i n value of the p r o p e r t y o r otherwise a f f e c t the p r o p e r t y so t h a t a l l or a p a r t t h e r e o f c o u l d not be 4 6 N e v e r t h e l e s s , the Attorney General i s not r e s t r i c t e d t o s e i z i n g o n l y the pr o p e r t y which he b e l i e v e d t o be f o r f e i t a b l e a t the time of a p p l i c a t i o n , but may a l s o s e i z e a n y t h i n g e l s e d i s c o v e r e d i n the course of the s e a r c h which g i v e s r i s e t o the same b e l i e f . Kenneth Young p r o v i d e s a c o l o u r f u l , i f extreme example: . . . t h i s 'person' can scan the contents of a Surrey townhouse and take away not onl y the cash 'proceeds of crime' of which the uniformed a f f i a n t was, a t minimum, l i k e l y s u s p i c i o u s ; but, as w e l l , the p i c t u r e s on the w a l l , the c a r p e t s on the f l o o r and whatever e l s e he may f i n d i n the p l a c e which, i n h i s view, c o n s t i t u t e 'proceeds of crime' as d e f i n e d by the p r o v i s i o n s of s. 462.3 (supra, n t. 31 a t 2.1.02). 4 7 Goyer asks how a judge i s t o become aware of persons w i t h such an i n t e r e s t (supra, n t. 30 a t 3.1.04). 4 8 B r i a n Weddell, " B i l l C-61 - Proposed C r i m i n a l Code Amendments - Proceeds of Crime," unpub. paper, Canadian Bar  Assoc., C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e Subsection Kamloops, 1989 a t 7. 4 9 I b i d , a t 7. 57 s e i z e d , " the judge may dispense with e i t h e r r equirement. 5 0 As i s o f t e n the case, t h i s e x c e p t i o n may w e l l become the r u l e , i t being d i f f i c u l t t o imagine many s i t u a t i o n s i n which the caveat c o u l d not a p p l y . 5 1 I f not the most c o n t r o v e r s i a l , c e r t a i n l y t h a t p o r t i o n of the s e a r c h and s e i z u r e p r o v i s i o n s causing the g r e a t e s t p r e s e n t concern t o the Crown, i s s. 462.32(6), which r e q u i r e s the A t t o r n e y General t o p r o v i d e "such undertakings as the judge c o n s i d e r s a p p r o p r i a t e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the payment of damages or c o s t s , or both, i n r e l a t i o n t o the issuance and execution of the w a r r a n t . " 5 2 The concept of a Crown undertaking with r e s p e c t t o f i n a n c i a l l i a b i l i t y i s new t o Canadian c r i m i n a l law. Such an instrument i s not mentioned elsewhere i n the C r i m i n a l Code. 5 3 i t s n e a r e s t e q u i v a l e n t b e i n g the undertakings which are commonplace i n v a r i o u s a s p e c t s of c i v i l law. Goyer compares i t t o those which g e n e r a l l y f o l l o w the g r a n t i n g of i n j u n c t i o n s , n o t i n g t h a t the i n c l u s i o n of t h i s 5 0 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.32 (5). 5 1 A p o s s i b l e s c e n a r i o might be the s e i z u r e of p r o p e r t y b e l o n g i n g t o a person known t o be out of the j u r i s d i c t i o n and unable t o d e a l with i t ; f o r example, w h i l e r e s i d e n t i n a f o r e i g n p r i s o n . 5 2 Paul S a i n t - D e n i s notes t h a t the amendments are s i l e n t r e s p e c t i n g e n t i t l e m e n t t o the damages and c o s t s and the p r o c e s s f o r determining e n t i t l e m e n t ("Rights of the Accused, T h i r d P a r t y R i g h t s , and Due Process," unpub. paper, NCPC a t 3) • 5 3 The Code does allow f o r undertakings on the p a r t of an accused as a form of i n t e r i m r e l e a s e (s. 816(1) and s. 831) and by a p r o s e c u t o r a t the h e a r i n g of a summary c o n v i c t i o n appeal (s. 817 and s. 831). N e i t h e r s c e n a r i o contemplates f i n a n c i a l l i a b i l i t y , however. 58 p r o v i s i o n came d u r i n g " f i n a l debate" and has caused t r e p i d a t i o n among v a r i o u s p r o v i n c i a l a t t o r n e y s g e n e r a l and law enforcement a g e n c i e s , t o the p o i n t t h a t some are not prepared t o operate under the l e g i s l a t i o n u n t i l t h e i r p o t e n t i a l c i v i l exposure i s b e t t e r u n d e r s t o o d . 5 4 Use of the words "such undertakings as the judge c o n s i d e r s a p p r o p r i a t e " has r e s u l t e d i n a t l e a s t one a p p l i c a t i o n t o dispense w i t h an u n d e r t a k i n g . 5 5 In my o p i n i o n , such a view o f f e n d s both the i n t e n t and a f a i r meaning of the p r o v i s i o n . The g r e a t e r problem w i l l be dete r m i n i n g an a p p r o p r i a t e d o l l a r f i g u r e . B r i a n Weddell suggests t h a t somebody w i l l "have t o c a l c u l a t e the p o s s i b l e f i n a n c i a l consequences" i n advance of an a p p l i c a t i o n . 5 6 Again, the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r doing so l i k e l y r e s i d e s w i t h the Crown. The v e r y nature of the undertaking i s u n c l e a r . I s i t c o r r e c t t o draw a comparison, as Goyer does, t o c i v i l u n d e rtakings? Weddell notes t h a t a l e g a l undertaking i s both "a h i g h l y t e c h n i c a l [and a] p e r s o n a l term," which can "only be g i v e n and e n f o r c e d a g a i n s t the i n d i v i d u a l g i v i n g i t . " 5 7 Does the term r e t a i n i t s 5 4 For example, what standard of care i s expected o f the Crown w i t h r e s p e c t t o the upkeep of p r o p e r t y , such as houses and c a r s ; i n the investment of monies and s e c u r i t i e s , such as s t o c k s and bonds; and f o r the l o s s of o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o p r o f i t (see supra. n t . 43 a t 8-9 and nt. 30 a t 3.1.04). Purdy notes t h a t the A t t o r n e y General of O n t a r i o has a p p a r e n t l y d e c i d e d not t o u t i l i z e the l e g i s l a t i o n due t o the l i a b i l i t y c r e a t e d by the u n d e r t a k i n g s (supra, n t. 43 a t 8). 5 5 Supra. n t . 43 a t 3. 5 6 Supra, n t . 48 a t 5. 5 7 I b i d . 59 p e r s o n a l nature i n the l e g i s l a t i o n , thereby r e q u i r i n g the At t o r n e y General t o g i v e a p e r s o n a l undertaking or w i l l the u n d e r t a k i n g of a Crown p r o s e c u t o r s u f f i c e ? 5 8 How can e i t h e r g i v e an und e r t a k i n g when, i n many cases, n e i t h e r w i l l have d i r e c t c o n t r o l o r custody over the s e i z e d or r e s t r a i n e d p r o p e r t y ? 5 9 These and other q u e s t i o n s c o n t i n u e t o p e r p l e x those whose j o b i t i s t o a d m i n i s t e r the l e g i s l a t i o n . 6 0 A f t e r e x e c u t i n g a s. 462.32 warrant, the s e i z e d p r o p e r t y must be d e t a i n e d , t a k i n g reasonable care t o p r e s e r v e i t s c o n d i t i o n . A r e p o r t must be f i l e d w i t h i n seven days and a copy p r o v i d e d , i f requested, t o the person from whom the p r o p e r t y was s e i z e d and t o anyone e l s e who, i n the judge's o p i n i o n , appears t o have a v a l i d i n t e r e s t i n the p r o p e r t y . 6 1 Although a number of C r i m i n a l Code s e c t i o n s a l r e a d y p r o v i d e f o r s e a r c h warrants, the d i f f e r e n c e s between t r a d i t i o n a l warrants and the s p e c i a l search warrants are s t r i k i n g . For example, the g e n e r a l C r i m i n a l Code warrants p r o v i d e d f o r i n s. 487: a) do not 5 8 I n t e r e s t i n g l y , i n the other Code p r o v i s i o n s d e a l i n g w i t h u n d e r t a k i n g s by a Crown o f f i c i a l , s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e i s made t o an undertaking by the "prosecutor" (see s. 817 and s. 831) . 5 9 Supra f n t . 48 a t 5-6. 6 0 Some answers w i l l l i k e l y be p r o v i d e d by the c o u r t s i n A u s t r a l i a and Great B r i t a i n . Paul S a i n t - D e n i s notes t h a t A u s t r a l i a ' s Proceeds of Crime A c t . 1987 c o n t a i n s an un d e r t a k i n g p r o v i s i o n almost i d e n t i c a l t o Canada's. In Great B r i t a i n , the Drug T r a f f i c k i n g Offences A c t . 1986 pe r m i t s compensation of persons a c q u i t t e d of charges under the l e g i s l a t i o n , who can demonstrate s e r i o u s l o s s or d e f a u l t (supra, n t . 52 a t 3). 6 1 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.32 (5). 60 r e q u i r e a p p l i c a t i o n by the Attorney General, b) need o n l y be gr a n t e d by a j u s t i c e 6 2 and c) permit the search f o r and s e i z u r e of evidence. Complementing the p r o v i s i o n s d e a l i n g w i t h s p e c i a l s e arch warrants i s s. 462.33, which allows f o r r e s t r a i n t o r d e r s t h a t p r o h i b i t or r e s t r i c t a person's a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h p r o p e r t y . They may be u t i l i z e d i n a d d i t i o n t o or i n p l a c e of the w a r r a n t s . 6 3 Here a l s o , a judge must be persuaded t h a t reasonable grounds e x i s t t o b e l i e v e t h a t the p r o p e r t y t a r g e t e d i s f o r f e i t a b l e . 6 4 The p r e -c o n d i t i o n s are the same as f o r a s p e c i a l s e arch warrant: a w r i t t e n a p p l i c a t i o n by the Attorney G e n e r a l 6 5 t o a h i g h c o u r t judge, with a f f i d a v i t i n s u p p o r t . 6 6 The ensuing order may appoint a c u s t o d i a n of the p r o p e r t y 6 7 and c o n t a i n such other "reasonable c o n d i t i o n s as the judge t h i n k s f i t . " 6 8 S i m i l a r t o the s p e c i a l search warrants, s. 462.33 c o n t a i n s a n o t i c e p r o v i s i o n 6 9 and r e q u i r e s the A t t o r n e y General's 6 2 Another e x c e p t i o n t o t h i s r u l e i s t e l e w a r r r a n t s which are grant e d by designated p r o v i n c i a l c o u r t judges (s. 487.1). 6 3 The E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Working Group recommended the c r e a t i o n of r e s t r a i n t o rders t o f r e e z e the proceeds of e n t e r p r i s e crime (supra, nt. 4 a t 177) . 6 4 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.33 (3). 6 5 I b i d . . s. 462.33 (1) and s. 462.33 (6). 6 6 I b i d . . s. 462.33 (1) and s. 462.33 (2). 6 7 I b i d . . s. 462 . 33 (3) (b) (i) . 6 8 I b i d . , s. 462 .33 (4) . 6 9 I b i d . , s. 462.33 (5) . u n d e r t a k i n g . 0 S e r v i c e of a copy of the order on the person named i s r e q u i r e d , 7 1 as i s r e g i s t r a t i o n a g a i n s t any p r o p e r t y a f f e c t e d by the o r d e r . 7 2 The s e i z u r e or r e s t r a i n t of p r o p e r t y remains v a l i d f o r a p e r i o d of s i x months from the time of s e i z u r e or the making of the r e s t r a i n t o r d e r , u n l e s s a renewal i s ob t a i n e d p r i o r t o e x p i r y . 7 3 In o r d e r t o o b t a i n a renewal, the At t o r n e y General must s a t i s f y a judge t h a t the p r o p e r t y may y e t become the s u b j e c t of c o n f i s c a t i o n p r o c e e d i n g s or i s 7 4 r e q u i r e d as e i t h e r p a r t of an i n v e s t i g a t i o n or as e v i d e n c e . 7 5 I n t e r e s t i n g l y , the renewal i s f o r an i n d e f i n i t e p e r i o d o f time. As w e l l , mention of the i n v e s t i g a t i v e and e v i d e n t i a r y use of the pr o p e r t y i s made d e s p i t e the absence of r e f e r e n c e t o e i t h e r as a b a s i s f o r the o r i g i n a l s e i z u r e or r e s t r a i n t o r d e r . There are no other p r o v i s i o n s i n the C r i m i n a l Code which 7 0 I b i d . . s. 462.33 (7). 7 1 I b i d . . s. 462.33(11). Disobeying the order a f t e r being s e r v e d w i t h a copy c o n s t i t u t e s an o f f e n c e , one of two C r i m i n a l Code o f f e n c e s c r e a t e d by the amendments (the oth e r b e i n g l a u n d e r i n g proceeds of cri m e ) . A h y b r i d o f f e n c e , i t i s a l s o one f o r which a wiretap a u t h o r i z a t i o n i s a v a i l a b l e . 7 2 I b i d . . s. 462.33 (9) . Reference t o r e g i s t r a t i o n " a g a i n s t any p r o p e r t y " o b v i o u s l y contemplates more than l a n d r e g i s t r a t i o n . I t n e c e s s a r i l y i n v o l v e s any s t a t u t o r y p r o v i n c i a l r e g i s t r y scheme i n v o l v i n g r e a l or p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y . 7 3 I b i d . , s. 462.35. 7 4 ' I s ' c o u l d be i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean 'may be' depending on whether the a p p l i c a b l e c l a u s e i s read c o n j u n c t i v e l y or d i s j u n c t i v e l y . 7 5 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.35. 62 p a r a l l e l the r e s t r a i n t orders e n v i s i o n e d by s. 462.33. They are a d e v i c e adopted d i r e c t l y from the c i v i l law of i n j u n c t i o n s . By t h e i r i n t r o d u c t i o n , Parliament chose t o s t e p o u t s i d e the t r a d i t i o n a l boundaries of c r i m i n a l law i n the hope of a d a p t i n g a c i v i l i n v e s t i g a t i v e t o o l t o the more demanding requirements of c r i m i n a l law. As w i t h the new warrants, however, i t r e c o g n i z e d the need f o r a more r i g o r o u s s c r u t i n y of a p p l i c a t i o n s than i n the case of t r a d i t i o n a l search warrants. A p o l i c e o f f i c e r a p pearing a t the r e s i d e n c e of a l a y j u s t i c e of the peace w i t h an I n f o r m a t i o n t o O b t a i n and an unsigned order would not s u f f i c e . The need f o r s t r i c t e r j u d i c i a l s c r u t i n y i s r e i n f o r c e d by the v e r y purpose f o r the new warrants and o r d e r s , not t o gather evidence or a s s i s t with i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , but t o make e i t h e r p o s t -c o n v i c t i o n or i n rem c o n f i s c a t i o n meaningful. A c c o r d i n g l y , an assessment of the l i k e l i h o o d of c o n v i c t i o n becomes of equal importance t o the need f o r a reasonable b e l i e f t h a t p r o p e r t y of i n t e r e s t w i l l be l o c a t e d i n a search. D e s p i t e a l l good i n t e n t i o n s , the i n c r e a s e d 'safeguards' may, however, prove t o be counter p r o d u c t i v e . I n e v i t a b l y comparisons w i l l be drawn t o the a u t h o r i z a t i o n procedure f o r w i r e t a p s . There, t h e onus upon the Crown to produce an e x h a u s t i v e a p p l i c a t i o n has i n c r e a s e d markedly over the past number of y e a r s . 7 6 The a f f i d a v i t s i n support are g e n e r a l l y extremely lengthy, time-consuming t o prepare and s u b j e c t t o i n t e n s e s c r u t i n y by defence c o u n s e l should 7 6 See Wilson v. The Queen [1983] 2 S.C.R. 594, 9 C.C.C. (3d) 87. 63 a 'package' be opened. Unavoidably, some would say p r o p e r l y , t h i s has d i s c o u r a g e d a p p l i c a t i o n s . Assuming t h a t the i n t e n t of the proceeds of crime l e g i s l a t i o n i s t o encourage the c o n f i s c a t i o n of i l l e g a l proceeds, a s i m i l a r r e s u l t would not be d e s i r a b l e . 7 7 F u r t h e r , d e s p i t e the d e t a i l e d a p p l i c a t i o n procedure r e q u i r e d f o r w i r e t a p a u t h o r i z a t i o n s , Kenneth Young's a c e r b i c comment t h a t most a p p l i c a t i o n s are e s s e n t i a l l y rubber stamped by j u d g e s 7 8 suggests e i t h e r t h a t members of the j u d i c i a r y are d i s p o s e d t o grant the a p p l i c a t i o n s with l i t t l e s c r u t i n y or t h a t those p r e s e n t e d are of v e r y h i g h q u a l i t y . By analogy, i f s p e c i a l s e a r c h warrant a p p l i c a t i o n s are rubber stamped, the r a t i o n a l e f o r a procedure which d i f f e r s from 'normal' search warrants i s o b v i a t e d , u n l e s s i t s e r v e s t o ensure t h a t o n l y q u a l i t y m a t e r i a l i s p l a c e d b e f o r e a judge. IN PERSONAM CONFISCATION The aims of the l e g i s l a t i o n are l a r g e l y s a t i s f i e d upon s e i z u r e or r e s t r a i n t of the o f f e n d i n g p r o p e r t y or proceeds of crime. Without the p e c u n i a r y means t o continue an i l l e g a l e n t e r p r i s e , most 7 7 A l r e a d y a d r a f t p r o t o c o l f o r Crown coun s e l i n B r i t i s h Columbia r e q u i r e s t h a t a l l a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r e i t h e r s p e c i a l s e a r c h warrants or r e s t r a i n t orders be r e f e r r e d t o R e g i o n a l Crown Counsel " f o r approval and i n s t r u c t i o n s " ("Draft f o r D i s c u s s i o n - P r o t o c o l f o r Crown Counsel - B i l l C-61 -Proceeds of Crime - S.C. 1988 c. 51," unpub. paper, 15 Dec. 1988) . 7 8 Supra. n t . 31. 64 c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s w i l l presumably be n e u t r a l i z e d or, a t l e a s t , c r i p p l e d . Unless the pr o p e r t y s e i z e d or r e s t r a i n e d i s c o n f i s c a t e d however, the p o s s i b i l i t y remains t h a t i t s r e t u r n w i l l permit the o r g a n i z a t i o n , assuming a malevolent nature, t o resume i t s i l l e g a l a c t i v i t i e s . For t h i s reason, c o n f i s c a t i o n remains of c o n s i d e r a b l e , a l t h o u g h secondary, importance t o the aims of the l e g i s l a t i o n . 7 9 The amendments use the word ' f o r f e i t u r e * throughout, although i n r e a l i t y both f o r f e i t u r e and c o n f i s c a t i o n are envisaged. In se n t e n c i n g a person c o n v i c t e d or d i s c h a r g e d 8 0 of an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e , s. 462.37(1) r e q u i r e s t h a t the c o u r t order the c o n f i s c a t i o n of proceeds of crime i f c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s are met. There must be an a p p l i c a t i o n by the Crown which s a t i s f i e s 8 1 a judge on a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s 8 2 t h a t the p r o p e r t y " i s proceeds of crime and t h a t the e n t e r p r i s e crime was committed i n r e l a t i o n t o t h a t p r o p e r t y . " The E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Working Group recommended c r e a t i o n of a l e g i s l a t i v e scheme p e r m i t t i n g c o n f i s c a t i o n of the proceeds of e n t e r p r i s e crime (supra n t . 4 a t 177). 8 0 The l e g i s l a t i o n uses the term " o f f e n d e r , " which i s d e f i n e d i n s. 2 as i n c l u d i n g persons who e i t h e r p l e a d g u i l t y or are found g u i l t y . I t t h e r e f o r e i n c l u d e s persons who o b t a i n an a b s o l u t e or c o n d i t i o n a l d i s c h a r g e pursuant t o s. 736. 8 1 The words " s a t i s f i e d " and " s a t i s f a c t i o n " a re used throughout the l e g i s l a t i o n t o express the standard of p e r s u a s i o n r e q u i r e d before a judge or c o u r t can make c e r t a i n o r d e r s . I t i m p l i e s a burden of proof l e s s than the c r i m i n a l s tandard, though not n e c e s s a r i l y a k i n t o the c i v i l t e s t , t o which s p e c i f i c r e f e r e n c e i s a l s o made i n the l e g i s l a t i o n . N e i l McCrank presumes, however, t h a t i t w i l l be i n t e r p r e t e d t o mean a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s ( " F o r f e i t u r e P r o v i s i o n s of B i l l C-61," unpub. paper, NCPC a t 6). 8 2 My emphasis, here and elsewhere i n t h i s c h a pter. 65 In the event t h a t the property, or a p a r t o r i n t e r e s t i n i t i s not e x i g i b l e , the c o u r t may order a f i n e i n l i e u . 8 3 S i t u a t i o n s i n which t h i s can occur i n c l u d e where the pr o p e r t y , p a r t o r i n t e r e s t cannot be l o c a t e d d e s p i t e d i l i g e n t attempts t o do s o , 8 4 has been t r a n s f e r r e d t o a t h i r d p a r t y , 8 5 i s o u t s i d e Canada, 8 6 has witnessed a s u b s t a n t i a l decrease i n v a l u e 8 7 or has been commingled t o the p o i n t where s e p a r a t i o n becomes d i f f i c u l t . 8 8 The f i n e must equal the o f f e n d e r ' s monetary i n t e r e s t i n the p r o p e r t y , although the method of v a l u a t i o n i s not s p e c i f i e d 8 9 and w i l l l i k e l y be q u i t e complex i n the case of missing, d i m i n i s h e d or comingled p r o p e r t y . I f the c o u r t opts f o r a f i n e , i t s h a l l impose a mandatory term i n d e f a u l t of payment which c o i n c i d e s w i t h a schedule i n s. 462.38(4). The d e f a u l t time, t o a maximum of 10 years, i s c o n s e c u t i v e t o any othe r term, i n c l u d i n g one a l r e a d y being s e r v e d . 9 0 8 3 Mosley suggests t h a t the f i n e a l t e r n a t i v e i s "comparable t o the U.K. ' c o n f i s c a t i o n o r d e r s ' and A u s t r a l i a n 'pecuniary p e n a l t y o r d e r s ' (supra, n t . 27 a t 19). 8 4 C r i m i n a l Code f s. 462.37 (3) (a) . R. v. S a u l t S t . Marie (1978) 40 C.C.C. (2d) 353 (S.C.C.) made the term "due d i l i g e n c e " a p a r t of Canada's l e g a l l e x i c o n (supra. n t . 81 a t 7) • 8 5 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.37(3)(b). McCrank asks whether use of the term " t h i r d p a r t y " i m p l i e s a person a t arm's l e n g t h from the t r a n s f e r o r (supra, n t . 81 a t 7). 86 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.37(3)(c). 87 I b i d s. 462.37(3)(d). 8 8 I b i d s. 462.37 (3) ( e ) . 89 Supra, MacFarlane, n t. 23 at 11-12. C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.37(4)(b). I f t h e Crown cannot connect the p r o p e r t y w i t h the i n s t a n t o f f e n c e , but i s ab l e t o prove beyond a reasonable doubt t h a t i t i s the "proceeds of crime," t h a t i s , d e r i v e d from an e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e , a judge may order c o n f i s c a t i o n . T h i s p r o v i s i o n c o d i f i e s the j u d i c i a l a c t i v i s m evidenced by the Manitoba Court of Appeal when i t overturned the r e s t o r a t i o n o r d e r i n v. Medd. 9 1 d e s p i t e the monies i n q u e s t i o n not having flowed from the p r e d i c a t e or another drug o f f e n c e . 9 2 By i n t r o d u c i n g the balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t , P a r l i a m e n t imported, from c i v i l law, a standard of proof t h a t has not s u r v i v e d c o u r t c h a l l e n g e s whenever in t r o d u c e d i n the p a s t . 9 3 The s p e c i f i c i n personam f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s elsewhere i n the Code permit the f o r f e i t u r e of items immediately connected t o an o f f e n c e , g e n e r a l l y e x h i b i t s a t t r i a l , such as contraband or the instruments of crime. Such f o r f e i t u r e f o l l o w s upon c o n v i c t i o n as an i n t e g r a l p a r t of the s e n t e n c i n g p r o c e s s . The amendments r e p r e s e n t Parliament's attempt t o t r e a t the c o n f i s c a t i o n of proceeds of crime i n l i k e f a s h i o n , 9 4 w i t h the 9 1 (1983) 7 C.C.C. (3d) 158. 9 2 See MacFarlane's comments r e s p e c t i n g R. v. Medd (supra. nt. 2 3 a t 6). 9 3 See, f o r example, R. v. Oakes [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103, 24 C.C.C. (3d) 321. 9 4 For example, the i n personam f o r f e i t u r e of p r e c i o u s metals (s. 394(2)) reads, i n p a r t , as f o l l o w s : Where a person i s c o n v i c t e d of an o f f e n c e under t h i s s e c t i o n , the c o u r t may order anything by means of or i n  r e l a t i o n t o which the o f f e n c e was committed. on such c o n v i c t i o n , t o be f o r f e i t e d . . . 67 e x c e p t i o n t h a t the nexus between the p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e and the proceeds may be proven on a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s r a t h e r than beyond a reasonable doubt. The reduced burden a s i d e , i t i s q u e s t i o n a b l e whether i n personam c o n f i s c a t i o n can even be compared t o the s p e c i f i c i n personam f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s elsewhere i n the Code. Assume, f o r example, t h a t a business venture i s the proceeds of crime and t h a t the e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e charged i s ' f r a u d . 1 Assume f u r t h e r t h a t the proceeds were t r a c e d from the f r a u d o f f e n c e , through a myriad of companies, domestic and o f f s h o r e , as w e l l as v a r i o u s bank accounts, i n t o the p o o l of money used t o purchase the b u s i n e s s . Can i t be s a i d t h a t the f r a u d o f f e n c e was committed i n r e l a t i o n t o the business venture? The answer i s l e s s important than r e c o g n i z i n g the very g r e a t d i f f e r e n c e between such a r e l a t i o n s h i p and one l i n k i n g contraband, f o r example a keg of b o o t l e g whisky, t o an e x c i s e o f f e n c e ; or an instrument of crime, f o r example a 'smoking' gun, t o a v i o l e n t crime. Only t h e f i n a l r e s u l t s are a l i k e . MacFarlane views the i n c l u s i o n of the balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s Juxtapose the f o r e g o i n g with the f o l l o w i n g from s. 462.37(1): ...where an o f f e n d e r i s c o n v i c t e d . . . o f an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e and the c o u r t . . . i s s a t i s f i e d . . . t h a t any p r o p e r t y i s proceeds of crime and t h a t the e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e was  committed i n r e l a t i o n t o t h a t p r o p e r t y , the c o u r t s h a l l o r d e r t h a t the p r o p e r t y be f o r f e i t e d . . . 68 t e s t as a s t a t u t o r y r e v e r s a l of R. v. Gardiner, 5 i n which the Supreme Court of Canada h e l d t h a t a sen t e n c i n g h e a r i n g i s i n t e g r a l t o a t r i a l and governed by the same standard of p r o o f . 9 6 R i c h a r d Mosley counters t h a t Gardiner was decided i n the absence of c o n t r a r y s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s "and t o r e s o l v e d i f f e r e n c e s of o p i n i o n on the i s s u e i n the c o u r t s below." He adds t h a t the U.S.S.C, i n McM i l l a n v. Penn. f 9 7 allowed t h a t a lower s t a n d a r d of pro o f does not v i o l a t e the due process requirement of the Fourth Amendment.98 Mosley suggests t h a t the l e s s e r burden arose from a concern f o r "the i n h e r e n t d i f f i c u l t i e s i n t r a c i n g and i d e n t i f y i n g the o r i g i n s o f a s s e t s which, by t h e i r very nature, a re s u b j e c t t o concealment and c o n v e r s i o n . " The f a c t remains, however, t h a t the i m p o r t a t i o n of the balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t r e p r e s e n t s a r a d i c a l i n n o v a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y when one c o n s i d e r s t h a t a person's l i b e r t y may hang i n the balance as a r e s u l t o f the mandatory d e f a u l t p r o v i s i o n s . To j u s t i f y i t s i n c l u s i o n as a counterweight t o 9 5 (1982) 68 C.C.C (2d) 477. See W i l l i a m F. Ehrcke, " L e t t i n g the Punishment F i t the Crime" (1990) 48 The  Advocate 545 a t 552, f o r a t i m e l y d i s c u s s i o n of G a r d i n e r . 9 6 Supra, MacFarlane, n t . 23 a t 4. I t remains t o be seen whether or not a sentencing h e a r i n g can be compared t o a c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g . 9 7 (1986) 91 L. Ed. 67. McMillan d e a l t w i t h s e n t e n c i n g g u i d e l i n e s and i s of l i m i t e d a s s i s t a n c e . However, Mosley a l s o c i t e s U.S. v. S a n d i n i (1987) 816 F. (2d) 869 a t 879 (3rd C i r . ) , the l e a d i n g American case i n support of the p r o p o s i t i o n t h a t a f o r f e i t u r e proceeding "brought a f t e r [the] g u i l t phase of [a] c r i m i n a l t r i a l , does not v i o l a t e due p r o c e s s " (supra, n t. 27 a t 18). 9 8 Supra, n t . 27 a t 18. 69 the absence of a t r a c i n g mechanism i s l e s s than s a t i s f a c t o r y . I n c l u s i o n of the c i v i l t e s t not o n l y appears t o c o n t r a d i c t a fundamental norm of Canadian c r i m i n a l law but i t a l s o seems t o b l u n t the Supreme Court's d e c i s i o n i n Gardiner. C h a l l e n g e s t o t h i s d e p a r t u r e w i l l l i k e l y f i n d succour i n the C h a r t e r . a s u b j e c t d i s c u s s e d i n Chapter Three. S u f f i c e t o say f o r the p r e s e n t t h a t i t r e p r e s e n t s an extremely v u l n e r a b l e aspect of t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n . A lthough s. 462.37(1) has t o date r e c e i v e d g r e a t e r a t t e n t i o n because of i t s i n c l u s i o n of the c i v i l t e s t , s. 462.37(2) poses an i n t e r e s t i n g , y e t q u i t e d i f f e r e n t problem. I t p e r m i t s the c o n f i s c a t i o n of p r o p e r t y which may not be connected t o e i t h e r the accused or the p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e , p r o v i d e d t h a t the p r o p e r t y i s beyond a reasonable doubt, the proceeds of crime. P a t r i c i a Donald asks how p r o p e r t y can be the proceeds of crime i f i t remains p o s s i b l e f o r the person from whom i t i s s e i z e d t o l a t e r be found i n n o c e n t . " Donald's query focuses on the r a t h e r c u r i o u s i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p contemplated i n t h i s s u b - s e c t i o n between an o f f e n d e r and the p r o p e r t y . The former becomes a mere c o n d u i t by which the matter and the p r o p e r t y are brought b e f o r e a c o u r t . The c r i m i n a l p r o c e s s i s but a v e h i c l e f o r a c o n f i s c a t i o n p r o c e s s which seeks not t o c o n v i c t but t o d i v e s t , arguably an abuse of p r o c e s s grounded on a dubious s t a t u t o r y b a s i s . A q u i t e s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n e x i s t s w i t h r e s p e c t t o i n rem c o n f i s c a t i o n . Supra, n t . 5 a t 7. 70 IN REM CONFISCATION Should a person charged with an e n t e r p r i s e crime or a d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e abscond or d i e p r i o r t o d i s p o s i t i o n of the matter, s. 462.38 1 0 0 p r o v i d e s t h a t a judge s h a l l order c o n f i s c a t i o n of p r o p e r t y upon a p p l i c a t i o n by the Crown and being s a t i s f i e d beyond a reasonable doubt t h a t i t i s the proceeds of crime, t h a t proceedings r e l a t i n g t o the p r o p e r t y a re o u t s t a n d i n g a g a i n s t the accused and t h a t he has d i e d or absconded. 1 0 1 1 0 0 I n c o r p o r a t e d i n the Food and Drugs A c t by s. 44.4 ( c o n t r o l l e d drugs) and s. 51 ( r e s t r i c t e d drugs) and i n the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t by s. 19.3. 1 0 1 S e c t i o n 462.38 reads as f o l l o w s : (1) Where an i n f o r m a t i o n has been l a i d i n r e s p e c t o f an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e , the Attorney General may make an a p p l i c a t i o n t o a judge f o r an order of f o r f e i t u r e under s u b s e c t i o n (2) i n r e s p e c t of any p r o p e r t y . (2) S u b j e c t t o s e c t i o n s 4 62.39 t o 4 62.41, where an a p p l i c a t i o n i s made t o a judge under s u b s e c t i o n (1) , the judge s h a l l , i f the judge i s s a t i s f i e d t h a t (a) any p r o p e r t y i s , beyond a reasonable doubt, proceeds of crime, (b) proceedings i n r e s p e c t of an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e committed i n r e l a t i o n t o t h a t p r o p e r t y were commenced, and (c) the accused charged with the o f f e n c e r e f e r r e d t o i n paragraph (b) had d i e d or absconded, o r d e r t h a t the p r o p e r t y be f o r f e i t e d t o Her Majesty t o be d i s p o s e d of as the Attorney General d i r e c t s or otherwise d e a l t w i t h i n accordance with the law. (3) For the purposes of t h i s s e c t i o n a person s h a l l be deemed t o have absconded i n connection w i t h an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e i f (a) an i n f o r m a t i o n has been l a i d a l l e g i n g the commission of 71 A person i s deemed t o have absconded i f a) charged w i t h an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e , 1 0 2 b) a warrant f o r the person's a r r e s t i s i s s u e d i n r e l a t i o n t o the i n f o r m a t i o n 1 0 3 and c) the warrant remains o u t s t a n d i n g f o r s i x months d e s p i t e r e a s o n a b l e attempts t o apprehend the accused. 1 0 4 The accused need not be the owner or person i n p o s s e s s i o n of the property, p r o v i d e d t h a t i t i s found t o be the proceeds of crime and t h a t the e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e was "committed i n r e l a t i o n t o t h a t p r o p e r t y . " 1 0 5 Furthermore, t h e r e i s no requirement t h a t the person abscond e i t h e r b e f o r e or a f t e r the o f f e n c e by the person, (b) a warrant f o r the a r r e s t of the person has been i s s u e d i n r e l a t i o n t o t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n , and (c) reasonable attempts t o a r r e s t the person pursuant t o the warrant have been u n s u c c e s s f u l d u r i n g the p e r i o d of s i x months commencing on the day the warrant was i s s u e d , and the person s h a l l be deemed t o have so absconded on the l a s t day of t h a t p e r i o d of s i x months. 1 0 2 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462 . 38 (3) (a) . MacFarlane e x p l a i n s the r a t i o n a l e f o r r e q u i r i n g t h a t an Information be e x t a n t : Whereas without the commencement of the c r i m i n a l p r o c e s s such l e g i s l a t i o n c o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d an i n v a s i o n of p r o v i n c i a l j u r i s d i c t i o n i n r e l a t i o n t o " p r o p e r t y and c i v i l r i g h t s i n the P r o v i n c e " , the i n i t i a t i o n of a c r i m i n a l a c t i o n demonstrates t h a t t h i s l e g i s l a t i v e scheme was intended t o form a p a r t of the p u n i t i v e a c t i o n of the c r i m i n a l c o u r t s : I n d u s t r i a l  Acceptance Corp. v. The Queen. [1953] 2 S.C.R. 273, hence f a l l i n g w i t h i n the c r i m i n a l law power of P a r l i a m e n t under head 27 of S e c t i o n 91 of The  C o n s t i t u t i o n Act. 1867 (supra, MacFarlane, n t . 23 a t 13) . 1 0 3 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462 . 38 (3) (b) . 1 0 4 I b i d . , s. 462.38(3) (c) . 1 0 5 Supra, MacFarlane, nt. 23 at 13. 72 the l a y i n g of the i n f o r m a t i o n , thereby contemplating both s c e n a r i o s . 1 0 6 MacFarlane c a u t i o n s t h a t law enforcement agencies must conduct "a r e a s o n a b l y thorough search" f o r the accused, not o n l y i n order t o o b t a i n a c o n f i s c a t i o n order, but a l s o t o p r o t e c t a g a i n s t an accused who appears a t some l a t e r p o i n t i n time and c h a l l e n g e s the c o n f i s c a t i o n order on the b a s i s t h a t reasonable attempts were not made t o l o c a t e and a r r e s t him. 1 0 7 Although i n rem c o n f i s c a t i o n may a t f i r s t b l u s h appear t o law enforcement o f f i c i a l s as something of a panacea, upon examining i n d i v i d u a l cases one's enthusiasm q u i c k l y wanes. A s i t u a t i o n a l r e a d y encountered by i n v e s t i g a t o r s i s t h a t of a person who absconds from Canada and i s a r r e s t e d and imprisoned i n a f o r e i g n c o u n t r y on an u n r e l a t e d charge. Assuming f o r the sake of argument t h a t p r o p e r t y connected t o t h a t person has been s e i z e d or r e s t r a i n e d i n Canada and t h a t the i n d i v i d u a l f a c e s a l e n g t h y p e r i o d of i n c a r c e r a t i o n abroad, what can be done? Must the Crown a c t as l a n d l o r d , manager, cons e r v a t o r or agent u n t i l the accused r e t u r n s t o f a c e the charges which await him or can i n rem p r o c e e d i n g s be invoked? Is i t p o s s i b l e t h a t i n c a r c e r a t i o n abroad s a t i s f i e s the requirement f o r "reasonable attempts t o a r r e s t the person?" A d m i t t e d l y the s e c t i o n w i l l adequately address v a r i o u s s i t u a t i o n s 1 0 6 I b i d , a t 14. There remains the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t c o u r t s w i l l equate the word 'abscond' with the l a t t e r s i t u a t i o n o n l y . 1 0 7 I b i d , a t 14. i n which an accused i s beyond the j u r i s d i c t i o n a l r e a c h of Canadian law enforcement. For example, the person who r e f u s e s t o v o l u n t a r i l y r e t u r n from a Caribbean i s l a n d w i t h which Canada does not possess an e x t r a d i t i o n t r e a t y i s p o t e n t i a l l y caught by the deeming p r o v i s i o n . But can the same be s a i d f o r someone who wishes t o r e t u r n but cannot because he i s i n c a r c e r a t e d abroad and i s not e l i g i b l e f o r e i t h e r e x t r a d i t i o n or a p r i s o n e r exchange? L o g i c says no, a l t h o u g h law enforcement w i l l understandably p l e a d otherwise. The answer, l i k e so many problems posed by the amendments, w i l l depend upon a combination of s t a t u t o r y and C h a r t e r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . In p a s s i n g , i t should be noted t h a t the amendments do not r e q u i r e t h a t p r o p e r t y c o n f i s c a t e d be under the c o u r t ' s custody or c o n t r o l a t the time t h a t a c o n f i s c a t i o n order i s made. I t may have been s e i z e d under the a u t h o r i t y of a ' r e g u l a r ' s e a r c h warrant or o b t a i n e d , by consent, without a warrant. In o t h e r words, n e i t h e r a s p e c i a l s e a r c h warrant nor a r e s t r a i n t order i s a p r e r e q u i s i t e f o r c o n f i s c a t i o n . Any e x i g i b l e p r o p e r t y which q u a l i f i e s as the proceeds of crime w i l l s u f f i c e , r e g a r d l e s s of how or when i t was o b t a i n e d . 1 0 8 Once c o n f i s c a t e d , p r o p e r t y escheats t o the Crown. T h i s i s s i m i l a r t o the v a r i o u s p r e - e x i s t i n g f o r f e i t u r e p r o v i s i o n s i n the Code, however i s d i f f e r e n t from those i n the N a r c o t i c  C o n t r o l A c t and the Food and Drugs A c t . 1 0 9 1 0 8 I b i d , a t 5. T h i s presumably i n c l u d e s p r o p e r t y o b t a i n e d by the a u t h o r i t i e s a f t e r the making of a c o n f i s c a t i o n o r d e r . 1 0 9 See Ch. 1. 74 THE NET WORTH INFERENCE In the absence of a t r a c i n g mechanism, the l e g i s l a t i o n seeks t o a s s i s t a u t h o r i t i e s with the d i f f i c u l t t a s k of p r o v i n g the i l l e g a l source of p r o p e r t y by c r e a t i n g , i n s. 462.39, 1 1 0 a s t a t u t o r y i n f e r e n c e of net worth. 1 1 1 I f i t can be demonstrated t h a t an accused person's net worth a f t e r commission of an o f f e n c e exceeds t h a t b e f o r e commission, a f t e r t a k i n g i n t o account income from sources u n r e l a t e d t o e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e s , the c o u r t may i n f e r t h a t the d i f f e r e n c e i s the proceeds of c r i m e . 1 1 2 MacFarlane q u e s t i o n s the need f o r the s t a t u t o r y i n f e r e n c e i n i t s p r e s e n t form, suggesting t h a t i t c o u l d " l o g i c a l l y be drawn upon p r o o f of the necessary f a c t s i n any e v e n t . " 1 1 3 C e r t a i n l y net 1 1 0 S e c t i o n 43.4 and s. 51 f o r d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e s under the Food and Drugs Act and s. 19.3 f o r comparable o f f e n c e s under the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t . 1 1 1 In i t s e n t i r e t y , s. 462.39 reads as f o l l o w s : For the purpose of s u b s e c t i o n 462.37(1) or 462.38(2), the c o u r t may i n f e r t h a t p r o p e r t y was obtained or d e r i v e d as a r e s u l t of the commission of an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e where evidence e s t a b l i s h e s t h a t the v a l u e , a f t e r the commission of t h a t of o f f e n c e , of a l l p r o p e r t y of the person a l l e g e d t o have committed the o f f e n c e exceeds the v a l u e of a l l the p r o p e r t y of t h a t person b e f o r e the commission of t h a t o f f e n c e and the c o u r t i s s a t i s f i e d t h a t the income of t h a t person from sources u n r e l a t e d t o e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e s or designated drug o f f e n c e s committed by t h a t person cannot reasonably account f o r such an i n c r e a s e i n v a l u e . 1 1 2 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.39. 1 1 3 Supra. MacFarlane, nt. 23 a t 15. 75 worthing i s not new t o f o r e n s i c accountants or c o u r t s t r y i n g 'white c o l l a r ' cases. However, an important caveat must be added. As MacFarlane notes, c o n f i s c a t i o n r e q u i r e s e i t h e r p r o o f on a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t h a t p r o p e r t y i s the proceeds of crime and t h a t the e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e was committed i n r e l a t i o n t o t h a t p r o p e r t y or proof beyond a reasonable doubt t h a t the p r o p e r t y i s the proceeds of crime. T h i s d i f f e r s from the nature of the i n f e r e n c e which a c o u r t i s e n t i t l e d t o draw under s. 462.39: " t h a t p r o p e r t y was obtained or d e r i v e d as a r e s u l t of the commission of an e n t e r p r i s e crime o f f e n c e , " causing MacFarlane t o suggest t h a t the i n f e r e n c e i s e v i d e n t i a r y i n nature and not intended t o d i s p l a c e the Crown's normal burden of proof: Presumably...the c o u r t w i l l s t i l l expect o t h e r evidence t o support the Crown's case f o r f o r f e i t u r e , p a r t i c u l a r l y where the h i g h e r burden of proof i s t o be imposed - i n c l u d i n g such " c o n v e n t i o n a l " evidence as s u r v e i l l a n c e , s e i z u r e s , documents, accomplice evidence, i n t e r c e p t e d p r i v a t e communications and o t h e r forms forms of c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence t e n d i n g t o show t h a t the p r o p e r t y i s the proceeds of c r i m e . 1 1 4 The d i f f i c u l t i e s t o be encountered w i t h the i n f e r e n c e w i l l l i k e l y r e v o l v e l e s s around i t s l e g a l e f f e c t than i t s p r a c t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y the mechanics of c o m p i l a t i o n . 1 1 5 1 1 4 I b i d , a t 17. 1 1 5 A person l a r g e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the modern use of the net worth concept by law enforcement p e r s o n n e l , R i c h a r d A. Nossen, c a u t i o n s t h a t the concept i t s e l f i s not without i n h e r e n t l i m i t a t i o n s : ...the net worth computation i s not a wh o l l y a c c u r a t e computation. On the c o n t r a r y , i t would be l i t e r a l l y i m p o s s i b l e t o i d e n t i f y a l l expenditures made by anyone over a p e r i o d of years due t o a l a c k of r e c o r d s and an i n a b i l i t y of witnesses t o remember a s e r i e s of events c o n c e r n i n g f i n a n c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n s entered i n t o w i t h a 76 V a l u a t i o n of one's net worth i s not a simple u n d e r t a k i n g i n the b e s t of s i t u a t i o n s . C o n s i d e r i n g t h a t many, i f not most, circ u m s t a n c e s g i v i n g r i s e t o the use of these p r o v i s i o n s w i l l i n v o l v e e x t r a - j u r i s d i c t i o n a l h o l d i n g s , and bank accounts, the t a s k i s m a g n i f i e d . I t i s f u r t h e r compounded by the need t o e x t r a p o l a t e back t o a date b e f o r e the commission of an o f f e n c e f o r an i n i t i a l assessment and t o a date a f t e r the o f f e n c e f o r a second assessment. To make matters worse, th e r e i s every l i k e l i h o o d t h a t the a u t h o r i t i e s w i l l encounter a d i s g u i s e d , i f not o b l i t e r a t e d or p a r t i a l l y o b l i t e r a t e d paper t r a i l . At the p r e s e n t time, i n v e s t i g a t o r s are faced with s i t u a t i o n s f o r which the i n f e r e n c e i s p o o r l y s u i t e d , s i t u a t i o n s i n which the commencement date of an o f f e n c e i s u n c l e a r or a s e r i e s of i l l e g a l t r a n s a c t i o n s occur a t i r r e g u l a r i n t e r v a l s over a p r o t r a c t e d p e r i o d of time. MacFarlane observes t h a t the s e c t i o n " l e a v e s u n d e f i n e d what amount of the defendant's p r o p e r t y can be i n f e r r e d as h a v i n g been d e r i v e d from i l l e g a l a c t i v i t y . " 1 1 6 He adds t h a t the i n f e r e n c e now makes r e l e v a n t an accused person's income, thereby l e n d i n g s t r e n g t h t a r g e t over a p e r i o d of years. At best, the net worth computation i s a r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of f i n a n c i a l events t h a t o c c u r r e d over a p e r i o d of y e a r s ; t h a t i s being p r e s e n t e d by the government not t o i n i t i a l l y prove the f i n a n c i a l crime committed by the t a r g e t , but t o c o r r o b o r a t e other evidence t h a t the t a r g e t d i d , i n f a c t , commit f i n a n c i a l crime (The D e t e c t i o n ,  I n v e s t i g a t i o n and P r o s e c u t i o n of F i n a n c i a l Crimes  (White C o l l a r . P o l i t i c a l C o r r u p t i o n and R a c k e t e e r i n g (Richmond, Va.: Nossen & Assocs., 1982). Supra, MacFarlane, nt. 2 3 a t 16. t o Crown e f f o r t s t o enter income tax r e t u r n s i n e v i d e n c e . 1 1 7 Purdy suggests " t h a t . . . income tax r e t u r n s should normally be r e l i e d upon as the primary i n d i c a t i o n of l e g i t i m a t e income." He notes t h a t any " a d d i t i o n a l l e g i t i m a t e income...may be d i s c l o s e d a t a subsequent h e a r i n g by the s u b j e c t , 1 , 1 1 8 presumably the c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g i t s e l f . The f a c t t h a t some income need not be r e p o r t e d t o t a x a u t h o r i t i e s 1 1 9 compounds the l i k e l i h o o d t h a t an accused must r i s e t o e x p l a i n the source of h i s income. T h e r e f o r e , d e s p i t e i t s e v i d e n t i a r y nature, the a b i l i t y of the net worth i n f e r e n c e t o f o r c e an o f f e n d e r t o the stand i n v i t e s comparison w i t h the r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e s which today face c h a l l e n g e under p r o v i s i o n s of the C h a r t e r , i n p a r t i c u l a r , the s. 11(d) presumption of innocence, a t o p i c pursued i n the f o l l o w i n g Chapter. THE PROTECTION OF PERSONS AFFECTED BY THE LEGISLATION The framers of the amendments made a c o n c e n t r a t e d e f f o r t t o p r o v i d e r e l i e f f o r persons p o t e n t i a l l y v i c t i m i z e d by the e f f e c t s of the l e g i s l a t i o n , through the i n c l u s i o n of v a r i o u s r e s t o r a t i v e and r e m e d i a l p r o v i s i o n s . R i c h a r d Mosley suggests t h a t "[w]herever the i n t e r e s t s of a t h i r d p a r t y r e s p e c t i n g the p r o p e r t y may be 1 1 7 I b i d . 1 1 8 Supra. n t . 43 a t 8. 1 1 9 For example: gambling and l o t t e r y winnings, i n h e r i t a n c e s and f o r e i g n savings brought i n t o Canada ( i b i d ) . 78 p r e j u d i c e d by a s e i z u r e warrant, r e s t r a i n i n g o r d e r or f o r f e i t u r e o r d e r , the A c t p r o v i d e s o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r j u d i c i a l review of the d e c i s i o n , exemptions and recovery t o the extent of the t h i r d p a r t y i n t e r e s t . " 1 2 0 T h i s apparent a b i l i t y of the l e g i s l a t i o n t o counter i t s own i n t r u s i v e nature has y e t t o be t e s t e d . In a d d i t i o n t o the Attorney General's u n d e r t a k i n g s , 1 2 1 the o p t i o n a l n o t i c e p r o v i s i o n s , 1 2 2 and the automatic e x p i r y of both s p e c i a l s e a r c h warrants and r e s t r a i n t o r d e r s , 1 2 3 i s s. 462.34, which p e r m i t s the review of warrants and o r d e r s . I t a l l o w s t h a t "any person who has an i n t e r e s t i n p r o p e r t y " a f f e c t e d by e i t h e r instrument may apply t o a s u p e r i o r c o u r t j u d g e , 1 2 4 a t any time, f o r p e r m i s s i o n t o examine the p r o p e r t y 1 2 5 or f o r o r d e r s d i r e c t i n g the r e t u r n of s e i z e d property, or a p a r t of i t ; r e v o k i n g or v a r y i n g a r e s t r a i n t order; or imposing "reasonable c o n d i t i o n s " on a r e s t r a i n t o r d e r . 1 2 6 So f a r so good, however from t h i s p o i n t forward the s e c t i o n becomes an i n t e r p r e t a t i v e nightmare. The judge may o n l y make such an order i f the a p p l i c a n t can come w i t h i n one of 1 < : u Supra. n t . 27 a t 21. 1 2 1 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.32 (6) and s. 462.32 (7). 1 2 2 I b i d . . s. 462.32 (5) and s. 462.33 (5). 1 2 3 I b i d . , s. 462.35. 1 2 4 The l e g i s l a t i o n does not r e q u i r e t h a t i t be the same judge who i s s u e d the warrant or order, n e v e r t h e l e s s Goyer suggests t h a t t h i s w i l l l i k e l y be the case (supra, n t . 30 a t 3.1.05). 1 2 5 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.34 (1) (b) and s. 462.34 (3). 1 2 6 I b i d . , s. 462.34(1) (a) a n d s . 462.34 (4). the f o l l o w i n g f o u r c a t e g o r i e s . F i r s t , i f the a p p l i c a n t e n t e r s i n t o a r e c o g n i z a n c e , w i t h or without s u r e t i e s or d e p o s i t , i n the d i s c r e t i o n of the j u d g e . 1 2 7 P a t r i c i a Donald suggests t h a t a l l s u c c e s s f u l a p p l i c a n t s under s. 462.34 w i l l l i k e l y be r e q u i r e d t o e n t e r i n t o such a r e c o g n i z a n c e . 1 2 8 Second, i f the a p p l i c a n t i s e i t h e r a person charged w i t h an e n t e r p r i s e crime or a designated drug o f f e n c e or has a c q u i r e d t i t l e or a r i g h t t o p o s s e s s i o n of the p r o p e r t y from such a person under cir c u m s t a n c e s which g i v e r i s e t o a reasonable i n f e r e n c e t h a t the t r a n s f e r was e f f e c t e d i n order t o a v o i d c o n f i s c a t i o n 1 2 9 and the a p p l i c a n t can s a t i s f y the judge f i r s t l y , t h a t the warrant or r e s t r a i n t o r d e r should not have been i s s u e d or made and secondly, t h a t the p r o p e r t y a f f o r d s no f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i v e or e v i d e n t i a r y p u r p o s e . 1 3 0 T h i r d , an a p p l i c a n t can succeed i f he i s o t h e r than a person t o which the f o r e g o i n g paragraph a p p l i e s and can s a t i s f y the judge f i r s t l y , t h a t he l a w f u l l y owns or possesses the p r o p e r t y "and appears innocent of any c o m p l i c i t y i n . . . o r any c o l l u s i o n i n r e l a t i o n t o " an e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e and secondly, t h a t the p r o p e r t y a f f o r d s no f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i v e or 1 2 7 I b i d - , s. 462.34(4) (a) . 1 2 8 Supra, n t . 5 a t 8. 1 2 9 Though the r e c i p i e n t may be unaware of t h i s u l t e r i o r purpose. 1 3 0 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.34 (4) (b) and s. 462.34 (6) (a) . 80 e v i d e n t i a r y purpose. 1 3 1 P a t r i c i a Donald, who d e s c r i b e s s. 462.34 as convoluted, c r i t i c i z e s t h i s t h i r d p r e c o n d i t i o n f o r a p p a r e n t l y r e q u i r i n g a d e t e r m i n a t i o n of g u i l t or innocence b e f o r e t r i a l . I t f a i l s t o d e f i n e the term "appears innocent" or p r o v i d e i n s t r u c t i o n r e s p e c t i n g e i t h e r the burden of proof or the procedure t o be f o l l o w e d by the judge. 1 3 2 Fourth, an order may be granted t o meet "the r e a s o n a b l e l i v i n g expenses" and the "reasonable business and l e g a l expenses" of e i t h e r the person i n p o s s e s s i o n of the p r o p e r t y s e i z e d or r e s t r a i n e d or anyone e l s e who appears t o have a v a l i d i n t e r e s t i n the p r o p e r t y and t h a t person's dependants. 1 3 3 S i m i l a r l y , the p r o p e r t y may be used i n order t o s a t i s f y the requirements of a P a r t XVI r e c o g n i z a n c e . 1 3 4 By p r o v i d i n g f o r l e g a l f e e s , the l e g i s l a t i v e d r a f t e r s c l e a r l y i n t e n d ed t o d e f l e c t a n t i c i p a t e d c r i t i c i s m from the c r i m i n a l defence bar which would, and d i d , understandably express shock a t the b r e a d t h of the new l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e and the t h r e a t i t posed t o lawyers and t h e i r t r u s t a c c o u n t s . 1 3 5 As a means of f a c i l i t a t i n g 1 3 1 I b i d . . s. 462.34 (4) (b) and s. 462 . 34 (6) (b) . 1 3 2 Supra. nt. 5 a t 6 and 12. 1 3 3 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462 . 34 (4) (c) ( i ) and s. 462.34(4) (c) ( i i ) . 1 3 4 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.34 (4) (c) ( i i i ) . A p p a r e n t l y "any person" can make a p p l i c a t i o n f o r use of the p r o p e r t y i n t h i s manner, not simply a person charged with an e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e or, f o r t h a t matter, w i t h any o f f e n c e . 1 3 5 Supra, nt. 31. 81 a d e t e r m i n a t i o n of e n t i t l e m e n t t o l e g a l f e e s w h i l e p r e s e r v i n g the s a n c t i t y of a l a w y e r - c l i e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p and an accused's defence, s. 462.34(5) r e q u i r e s t h a t the h e a r i n g be conducted i n camera and i n t h e absence of the Attorney General. The c u r i o u s r e s u l t of t h i s p r e c a u t i o n i s , however, t h a t the judge must a r r i v e a t a d e c i s i o n based on m a t e r i a l p r o v i d e d by the accused and h i s c o u n s e l or which i s on t h e c o u r t f i l e . The judge i s faced with two very b a s i c problems. F i r s t , d e t e r m i n i n g the reasonableness of l e g a l expenses without r e q u i r i n g an accused t o d i s c l o s e h i s d e f e n c e 1 3 6 and second, the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t such f e e s w i l l be p a i d out of monies which are the proceeds of crime, or worse y e t , the p r o p e r t y of i d e n t i f i e d , i d e n t i f i a b l e or n o n - i d e n t i f i a b l e v i c t i m s , f o r c i n g a v i c t i m t o s u b s i d i z e an accused person's l e g a l expenses. T h i s view i s m i t i g a t e d t o a c e r t a i n e x t e n t by the requirement i n s. 462.34(2) (b) t h a t the judge may r e q u i r e t h a t n o t i c e "be g i v e n t o and may hear any person who, i n the o p i n i o n of the judge, appears t o have a v a l i d i n t e r e s t i n the p r o p e r t y . " 1 3 7 In the absence of an i n v e s t i g a t i v e s t a f f , however, 1 3 6 Kenneth Young asks whether c r i m i n a l defence c o u n s e l are now "bound t o d i s c l o s e , i n f o r m a l l y , t e s t i m o n i a l l y or by a f f i d a v i t , the nature and extent of our i n v e s t i g a t i o n s and, i n the p r o c e s s , so undermine the p r i v i l e g e and c o n f i d e n t i a l i t y of our r e l a t i o n s h i p with our c l i e n t " ( i b i d , a t 2.1.04). P a t r i c i a Donald takes the concern one step f u r t h e r by a s k i n g whether the c o u r t s w i l l become l i n k s i n the v e r y l a u n d e r i n g c h a i n which they seek t o e l i m i n a t e (supra, n t . 5 a t 11). 1 3 7 C u r i o u s l y , d e s p i t e the f a c t t h a t the A t t o r n e y General can n e i t h e r appear nor i n t e r v e n e , s. 462.34(2)(a) r e q u i r e s e i t h e r two c l e a r days w r i t t e n n o t i c e t o the A t t o r n e y General or the A t t o r n e y General's consent before an a p p l i c a t i o n can 82 the judge i s f o r c e d t o decide t o whom n o t i c e should be g i v e n on the b a s i s of the m a t e r i a l f i l e d i n support of the a p p l i c a t i o n or the c o u r t f i l e . Any land t i t l e , company o f f i c e or l i e n searches would have t o be conducted by the a p p l i c a n t , a t the r e q u e s t of the judge or i n a n t i c i p a t i o n of such a request. Furthermore, the v e x i n g q u e s t i o n of what c o n s t i t u t e s a " v a l i d i n t e r e s t " awaits d e f i n i t i o n . Although the Crown l i k e l y has a p o s i t i v e o b l i g a t i o n t o b r i n g the names of i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s t o the a t t e n t i o n of the judge i n r e s p e c t of most a p p l i c a t i o n s , i t can h a r d l y do so on a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r l e g a l expenses when i t has no s t a n d i n g . Furthermore, i t i s d o u b t f u l t h a t a p a r a l l e l o b l i g a t i o n c o u l d be imposed on the accused without i m p a i r i n g h i s a b i l i t y t o make f u l l answer and defence. F i n a l l y , i t should be noted t h a t t h i r d p a r t y i n t e r e s t s are a l s o c o n s i d e r e d d u r i n g and a f t e r the c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g . N o t i c e t o persons who the c o u r t opines have a v a l i d i n t e r e s t i n p r o p e r t y i s r e q u i r e d by s. 462.41. Rather than see proceeds of crime escheat t o the Crown, the c o u r t may order the r e t u r n of p r o p e r t y t o persons innocent of c o m p l i c i t y or c o l l u s i o n i n the e n t e r p r i s e crime or d e s i g n a t e d drug o f f e n c e and who are e i t h e r the l a w f u l owners or l a w f u l l y e n t i t l e d t o p o s s e s s i o n of the p r o p e r t y . 1 3 8 S e c t i o n 462.42 p r o v i d e s f o r r e l i e f from c o n f i s c a t i o n where an a p p l i c a t i o n i s made w i t h i n t h i r t y days and s. 462.43 g i v e s the c o u r t a r e s i d u a l a u t h o r i t y t o d i s p o s e of p r o p e r t y s e i z e d or r e s t r a i n e d . Appeals are p e r m i t t e d under s. 462.44 and c o n f i s c a t i o n i s suspended d u r i n g the be heard. 1 3 8 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.41(3). 83 appeal p e r i o d . 1 3 9 SUMMARY The proceeds of crime amendments i n t r o d u c e a wide range of i n n o v a t i v e concepts t o Canada's c r i m i n a l law. P o t e n t i a l l y , the l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e has a tremendous reach. Combined w i t h new t o o l s i n t he form of s p e c i a l search warrants and r e s t r a i n t o r d e r s , law enforcement agencies may now pursue i n v e s t i g a t i o n s which had h i t h e r t o stymied them due t o an absence of s t a t u t o r y muscle. The harsh r e a l i t y of c o n f i s c a t i o n , both i n personam and i n rem, has the p o t e n t i a l of d i v e s t i n g persons of v a s t sums of money and other p r o p e r t y . The success of Parliament's attempt t o counter the i n t r u s i v e nature of the search, s e i z u r e and c o n f i s c a t i o n p r o v i s i o n s by the c r e a t i o n of v a r i o u s checks and balances remains t o be seen. C r i t i c s o f the l e g i s l a t i o n a l r e a d y abound; however i t s p r i n c i p a l problem i s not from without but from w i t h i n T i t s own l a c k of c l a r i t y . Many of i t s p r o v i s i o n s w i l l r e q u i r e y e a r s of l i t i g a t i o n i n o r d e r t o d e f i n e t h e i r breadth and extent and much of t h a t l i t i g a t i o n w i l l r e v o l v e around Charter c h a l l e n g e s , a s u b j e c t c o n s i d e r e d i n the f o l l o w i n g Chapter. I b i d . , s. 462.45. 84 CHAPTER 3 THE AMENDMENTS AND THE CHARTER D e s p i t e being i n f o r c e f o r almost two y e a r s , the proceeds of crime amendments have y e t t o be t e s t e d i n the s u p e r i o r c o u r t s of the p r o v i n c e s , l e t alone the Supreme Court of Canada. The p a u c i t y of j u d i c i a l d e c i s i o n s i s probably the combined r e s u l t o f s e v e r a l f a c t o r s : a l a c k of w i l l on the p a r t of p o l i t i c a l l e a d e r s t o make use of the l e g i s l a t i o n , a tendency f o r governments t o employ e x t r a -j u d i c i a l remedies and arrangements, t r e p i d a t i o n on the p a r t of governments f a c e d with f i n a n c i a l undertakings and a degree of r e l u c t a n c e on the p a r t of many law enforcement o f f i c i a l s and Crown p r o s e c u t o r s t o pursue new i n v e s t i g a t i v e and e v i d e n t i a r y procedures. 1 With time, however, cases w i l l i n e v i t a b l y wind t h e i r way up the j u d i c i a l ladder and o b t a i n c a r e f u l s c r u t i n y , much of which w i l l c e n t r e on the c o m p a t i b i l i t y of the amendments w i t h the C h a r t e r o f R i g h t s and Freedoms. Pr o c l a m a t i o n of the Charter i n 1982 was the b e g i n n i n g of a new e r a f o r Canadian c r i m i n a l law. Suddenly, many common law p r i n c i p l e s and r i g h t s obtained a form of p r o t e c t i o n p r e v i o u s l y u n a t t a i n a b l e . At the same time, other p r i n c i p l e s , e i t h e r borrowed from the American example or t r u l y new, found e x p r e s s i o n and begged i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . 1 These f a c t o r s are con s i d e r e d a t g r e a t e r l e n g t h i n Chapter Four. 85 Today, one cannot speak of the norms and t r a d i t i o n s of c r i m i n a l law without i n c l u d i n g those enshrined i n the C h a r t e r . The purpose of t h i s Chapter i s , t h e r e f o r e , t o examine the proceeds of crime amendments from the p e r s p e c t i v e of the C h a r t e r . As the l e g i s l a t i o n c l e a r l y i n v i t e s c h a l l e n g e i n a number of areas, o n l y those which are e s s e n t i a l t o t:he e f f e c t i v e implementation of the l e g i s l a t i v e scheme are overviewed. S e c t i o n s 8 2 and 11(d) 3 are reviewed i n c o n s i d e r a b l e d e t a i l , f o l l o w e d by a b r i e f overview of s. 7 4 and the l e g i s l a t i v e o b j e c t i v e t e s t f o r s. I.5 I n t e g r a l t o the d i s c u s s i o n which f o l l o w s i s an assessment of the i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e s e s e c t i o n s on the v i a b i l i t y of the amendments. Although c o n f i s c a t i o n i s not dependant on s e i z u r e or r e s t r a i n t i n the f a s h i o n contemplated by the amendments,6 most proceeds of crime cases w i l l l i k e l y be i n i t i a t e d by the use of s p e c i a l s e arch warrants and r e s t r a i n t o rders, a seemingly l o g i c a l p l a c e t o begin t h i s a n a l y s i s . 2 Search and s e i z u r e . 3 Presumption of innocence. 4 L i f e , l i b e r t y and s e c u r i t y of the person. 5 Reasonable l i m i t s on r i g h t s and freedoms. 6 P r o p e r t y s e i z e d pursuant t o 'normal* search warrants and consent searches, or which i s not even under s e i z u r e , i s a l s o arguably open t o c o n f i s c a t i o n (see C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.37). 86 SPECIAL SEARCH WARRANTS, RESTRAINT ORDERS AND SECTION 8 The amendments c r e a t e a mechanism f o r o b t a i n i n g e i t h e r a s p e c i a l s e a r c h warrant or a r e s t r a i n t order which mimics the procedure used t o o b t a i n a wiretap a u t h o r i z a t i o n . As d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter Two, s. 462.32 allows a judge t o i s s u e a s p e c i a l search warrant, e n t i t l i n g the named person t o se a r c h "any b u i l d i n g , r e c e p t a c l e or p l a c e " f o r "any p r o p e r t y i n r e s p e c t of which an order of f o r f e i t u r e may be made" and t o " s e i z e t h a t p r o p e r t y and any ot h e r p r o p e r t y i n r e s p e c t of which t h a t person or peace o f f i c e r b e l i e v e s , on reasonable grounds, t h a t an order of f o r f e i t u r e may be made." S i m i l a r l y , a r e s t r a i n t order i s a v a i l a b l e under s. 462.33 i f a judge i s " s a t i s f i e d t h a t t h e r e are reasonable grounds t o b e l i e v e t h a t t h e r e e x i s t s any p r o p e r t y i n r e s p e c t of which an order of f o r f e i t u r e may be made."7 The order may p r o h i b i t o r r e s t r i c t a person's a b i l i t y t o d e a l with p r o p e r t y , appoint a c u s t o d i a n o f the p r o p e r t y , r e q u i r e t h a t the p r o p e r t y be d e l i v e r e d t o the c u s t o d i a n and, or any other c o n d i t i o n s deemed reasonable by the judge. 8 The f u t u r e of s p e c i a l search warrants and, t o a l e s s e r degree, r e s t r a i n t o r d e r s , depends on t h e i r a b i l i t y t o s u r v i v e a c h a l l e n g e based on s. 8 of the Charter, which p r o v i d e s t h a t "[e]veryone has 7 I b i d . , s. 462.33 (3) . 8 I b i d . , s. 462.33(3)(b) a n d s . 462.33(4). 87 the r i g h t t o be secure a g a i n s t unreasonable s e a r c h o r s e i z u r e . " 9 I t s s u c c i n c t phraseology b e l i e s both the c o m p l e x i t i e s i n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and the abundance of j u r i s p r u d e n c e which a l r e a d y s w i r l around t h i s important l e g a l r i g h t . 1 0 The essence of s. 8 i s the word 'unreasonable. 1 E v e r y t h i n g e l s e i s secondary. The l e a d i n g p o s t - C h a r t e r d e c i s i o n r e g a r d i n g searches i s the Supreme Court of Canada d e c i s i o n i n Hunter v.  Southam I n c . 1 1 Dickson J . (as he then was) , w r i t i n g f o r the Court, d e s c r i b e d the guarantee as "vague and open," 1 2 e x p r e s s i n g the need f o r "a broad, p u r p o s i v e " approach t o i n t e r p r e t i n g i t and other s p e c i f i c l e g a l r i g h t s i n the C h a r t e r . 1 3 The purpose of s. 8, he wrote, i s t o guarantee "a broad and g e n e r a l r i g h t t o be secure from Although more c o n c i s e , the s e c t i o n bears s t r i k i n g resemblance t o the Fourth Amendment t o the U n i t e d S t a t e s C o n s t i t u t i o n , which reads: The r i g h t of the people t o be secure i n t h e i r persons, houses, papers and e f f e c t s , a g a i n s t unreasonable  searches and s e i z u r e s , s h a l l not be v i o l a t e d , and no Warrants s h a l l i s s u e , but upon p r o b a b l e cause, supported by Oath or a f f i r m a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y d e s c r i b i n g the p l a c e t o be searched and the person or t h i n g s t o be s e i z e d [my emphasis]. Not s u r p r i s i n g l y , the S.C.C. has a l r e a d y made c o n s i d e r a b l e use of American j u r i s p r u d e n c e i n i t s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f s. 8. 1 0 Mr. J u s t i c e David McDonald notes t h a t "no ot h e r s e c t i o n i n the l e g a l r i g h t s p a r t of the Charter...has r e c e i v e d more comprehensive s c r u t i n y and i n t e r p r e t a t i v e guidance from the Supreme Court of Canada than has s. 8" (Legal R i g h t s i n the Canadian C h a r t e r of Righ t s and Freedoms, 2nd ed. (Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989) a t 227). 1 1 [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145, 14 C.C.C. (3d) 97. 1 2 I b i d , a t 154 S.C.R., 105 C.C.C. 1 3 I b i d , a t 156 S.C.R., 106 C.C.C. 88 unreasonable search and s e i z u r e . " 1 4 He c a l l e d f o r a b a l a n c i n g between the p u b l i c ' s i n t e r e s t i n p r i v a c y and government's a b i l i t y t o i n t r u d e on t h a t p r i v a c y i n the i n t e r e s t of law enforcement. 1 5 To a s s i s t i n t h i s d e termination, Dickson J . e s t a b l i s h e d a t h r e e -f o l d t e s t . F i r s t , " p r i o r a u t h o r i z a t i o n " must be o b t a i n e d where " f e a s i b l e . " 1 6 Second, the a u t h o r i z a t i o n process must be conducted i n a " n e u t r a l and i m p a r t i a l manner" by a person a c t i n g j u d i c i a l l y and who i s s u f f i c i e n t l y informed of the c i r c u m s t a n c e s . 1 7 T h i r d , the minimum a c c e p t a b l e standard i s a sworn b e l i e f , on reasonable grounds, " t h a t an o f f e n c e has been committed and t h a t t h e r e i s evidence t o be found a t the p l a c e of the s e a r c h . " 1 8 A p p l y i n g s. 8 t o the proceeds of crime amendments i s an i n t e r e s t i n g t a s k . A l a n Gold suggests t h a t the d e s c r i p t i o n o f the warrant i n s. 462.32 (1) " i s r a t h e r p e c u l i a r and seems t o be an attempt by the draftsman t o circumvent" the Supreme Court of Canada's d e c i s i o n i n Hunter. 1 9 He r e f e r s t o t h a t p o r t i o n of the s u b - s e c t i o n which p u r p o r t s t o allow a person t o s e i z e "any other p r o p e r t y i n r e s p e c t of which t h a t person or peace o f f i c e r b e l i e v e s , on r e a s o n a b l e grounds, t h a t an order of f o r f e i t u r e may be made." 1 4 I b i d , a t 158 S.C.R., 107 C.C.C. 1 5 I b i d , a t 159 S.C.R., 108 C.C.C. 1 6 I b i d , a t 160-61 S.C.R., 109 C.C.C. 1 7 I b i d , a t 162 S.C.R., 110 C.C.C. 1 8 I b i d , a t 168 S.C.R., 115 C.C.C. 1 9 A l a n D. Gold, Proceeds of Crime - A Manual w i t h  Commentary on B i l l C-61 (Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989) a t 35. 89 He opines t h a t " [ t ] h e draftsman was t r y i n g t o d i s g u i s e what i s e s s e n t i a l l y a power t o s e i z e without warrant and s h e l t e r i t under the apparent a u t h o r i t y of the warrant." 2 0 I s Gold c o r r e c t t o suggest t h a t s. 462.32(1) o f f e n d s the Hunter d e c i s i o n and, i f so, does i t n e c e s s a r i l y f o l l o w t h a t the s e c t i o n i s i n c o n s i s t e n t with s. 8 of the Ch a r t e r ? To begin, n e i t h e r the f a c t s nor the s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n s i n Hunter are on a l l f o u r s w i t h the problem posed by s. 462.32 (1) . The s e a r c h i n Hunter was a u t h o r i z e d by other than a j u d i c i a l o f f i c i a l and i n a manner which f a i l e d t o meet the standard p r e s c r i b e d by Dickson. In the case of the amendments, the f i r s t two t e s t s i n Hunter are c l e a r l y s a t i s f i e d by the need f o r p r i o r a u t h o r i z a t i o n from a s u p e r i o r c o u r t judge. The b e d e v i l i n g q u e s t i o n , however, i s whether the s e c t i o n meets the t h i r d t e s t . In t h a t t e s t , Dickson J . d i d not s p e c i f i c a l l y l i n k t he o f f e n c e s u spected w i t h the evidence l o c a t e d , however i t seems d i f f i c u l t t o rea c h any other r a t i o n a l c o n c l u s i o n . A l l o w i n g i n v e s t i g a t o r s t o o b t a i n a warrant based on i n f o r m a t i o n r e s p e c t i n g a s p e c i f i c o f f e n c e and t h e r e a f t e r cause a ge n e r a l search t o be made f o r "any other p r o p e r t y i n r e s p e c t of which...an order of f o r f e i t u r e may be made" 2 1 seems t o d e f e a t the e n t i r e r a t i o n a l e f o r p r i o r a u t h o r i z a t i o n . Arguably, the door would be open t o p r e t e x t s e a r c h e s . On the other hand, i t i s undeniable t h a t i n the course 2 0 I b i d , a t 37. Gold quotes M a r t i n J.A.'s judgment i n R. v.  Noble (1984) 42 C R . (3d) 209 (Ont. C.A.), i n which M a r t i n compares w r i t s of a s s i s t a n c e t o "general warrants." 2 1 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.32 (1). 90 of a search, be i t f o r n a r c o t i c s , s t o l e n p r o p e r t y or money, i n v e s t i g a t o r s may w e l l stumble upon items not s p e c i f i e d i n the warrant which they reasonably b e l i e v e are evidence of c r i m i n a l a c t i v i t y . The v i r e s of s. 462.32 (1) can be t e s t e d by examining how items not named i n a 'normal' s. 487 search warrant are l a w f u l l y s e i z e d i n s i m i l a r circumstances. There are two p o s s i b i l i t i e s , t h a t they e i t h e r f i t w i t h i n the parameters of e i t h e r s. 489 of the Code or the ' p l a i n view' d o c t r i n e . 2 2 S e c t i o n 489 reads as f o l l o w s : 2 2 T h i s d o c t r i n e must be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from t h a t of •abandonment.* When a suspected o f f e n d e r abandons items which may prove t o be evidence of crime, i n t e r e s t i n g q u e s t i o n s a r i s e r e s p e c t i n g the a b i l i t y of p o l i c e t o s e i z e the items. American c o u r t s view t h e i r d i s c a r d as an abandonment of a p r i v a c y i n t e r e s t and t h e r e f o r e the p o l i c e s e i z u r e i s not a search i n terms of the Fo u r t h Amendment (see Hester v. U.S. (1924) 265 U.S. 57 (U.S.S.C.) and U.S. v.  Manning (1971) 440 F. 2d 1105 (U.S.C.A., 5th C i r . ) ) . Garbage, f o r example, has long been a v a l u a b l e source of evidence f o r p o l i c e i n v e s t i g a t o r s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n 'document cas e s . ' C a l i f o r n i a v. Greenwood (1988) 56 U.S.L.W. 4409 approved w a r r a n t l e s s searches of garbage and adopted the 'reasonable e x p e c t a t i o n of p r i v a c y t e s t ' annunciated f o r abandoned a r t i c l e s i n C i t y of St. Paul v. Vaughn (1975) 237 N.W. 2d 365 (S.C. Minn.). McDonald notes t h a t t h e r e are no Canadian d e c i s i o n s " d e a l i n g d i r e c t l y w i t h the e f f e c t of abandonment," however suggests t h a t i t i s "reasonably c l e a r t h a t Canadian c o u r t s would reach the same d e c i s i o n s as American c o u r t s " f s u p r a . , n t . 10 a t 275). He adds t h a t L a F o r e s t J . used the rea s o n a b l e e x p e c t a t i o n of p r i v a c y t e s t when d i s t i n g u i s h i n g the • f i n d i n g * of blood from the 'taking' of blood i n R v. Dvment (1988) 66 C R . (3d) 348, 45 C.C.C. (3d) 244 ( S . C . C ) . In the c e l e b r a t e d 'Squamish F i v e ' c a s e i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Toy J . (as he then was) co n s i d e r e d the s e i z u r e of garbage from i n f r o n t of the susp e c t s ' r e s i d e n c e . He concluded: "I am unable t o c h a r a c t e r i z e the removal of garbage a p p a r e n t l y abandoned f o r d e l i v e r y t o the garbage d i s p o s a l area as an unreasonable s e i z u r e " (R v. T a y l o r , 26 Jan. 1984, unreported, B.C.S.C. a t 13). 91 Every person who executes a warrant i s s u e d under s e c t i o n 462.32, 487 or 487.1 may s e i z e , i n a d d i t i o n t o the t h i n g s mentioned i n the warrant, anything t h a t the person b e l i e v e s on r e a s o n a b l e grounds has been obtained by or has been used i n the commission of an o f f e n c e . I n c o r p o r a t i o n of s. 462.32 i n s. 489 c o i n c i d e d w i t h the p r o c l a m a t i o n of the amendments. I t broadened the scope of s. 462.32, which a l r e a d y encompassed the s e i z u r e of items named i n a s p e c i a l s e a r c h warrant and items not named but f o r which a c o n f i s c a t i o n order may be made, t o i n c l u d e the s e i z u r e of contraband and the instruments of an o f f e n c e . However, s e c t i o n 489 does not permit the s e i z u r e of items which cannot be i n c l u d e d w i t h i n these c a t e g o r i e s , r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r e v i d e n t i a r y or other worth. 2 3 One might suggest t h a t s. 489 makes the r e s i d u a l p o r t i o n of s. 462.32 redundant. There i s a r e a l d i f f e r e n c e though between " t h i n g s . . . o b t a i n e d by...the commission of an o f f e n c e " i n s. 489 and the "proceeds of crime," which are i n t e g r a l t o a c o n f i s c a t i o n order under e i t h e r s. 462.37(1) or 462.38(2). S e c t i o n 462.3 d e f i n e s the l a t t e r as "any p r o p e r t y , b e n e f i t or advantage, w i t h i n or o u t s i d e Canada, o b t a i n e d or d e r i v e d d i r e c t l y or i n d i r e c t l y as a r e s u l t of [an e n t e r p r i s e crime or a designated drug o f f e n c e ] " The very purpose of the amendments was t o overcome the i n a b i l i t y of e x i s t i n g p r o v i s i o n s of the Code t o d e a l with the p r o f i t s of crime, the c o u r t s h a ving r e s t r i c t e d e x i s t i n g search and s e i z u r e p r o v i s i o n s t o 2 3 T h i s i n v i t e s the q u e s t i o n - why do s. 462.32 and s. 489 not p ermit the s e i z u r e of evidence? Must i n v e s t i g a t o r s i n t e n t on s e i z i n g both the proceeds of crime and evidence i n support of a charge o b t a i n both a s. 462.32 and a s. 487 warrant? 92 t a n g i b l e and e x i g i b l e items. Furthermore, as noted above, s. 489 does not permit the s e i z u r e of evidence. The p l a i n view d o c t r i n e i s o f g r e a t e r a s s i s t a n c e . Much of the j u r i s p r u d e n c e r e s p e c t i n g t h i s d o c t r i n e , l o n g -s t a n d i n g i n the law of search and s e i z u r e , d e a l s w i t h w a r r a n t l e s s searches, e i t h e r of persons or pr o p e r t y . In the case of l a w f u l searches pursuant t o the a u t h o r i t y of a warrant, the F e d e r a l Court of Appeal r e c e n t l y s t a t e d the f o l l o w i n g i n S o l v e n t Petroleum  E x t r a c t i o n Inc. v. M.N.R.:24 The common law r u l e with regard t o the " p l a i n view" d o c t r i n e i s t h a t where, d u r i n g the course of e x e c u t i n g a l e g a l warrant, an o f f i c e r l o c a t e s anything which he re a s o n a b l y b e l i e v e s i s evidence of the commission of a crime, he has power t o s e i z e i t . 2 5 A c l a s s i c restatement of the d o c t r i n e i s found i n C o o l i d q e v. New Hampshire. a d e c i s i o n of the Un i t e d S t a t e s Supreme C o u r t . 2 6 In C o o l i d q e . Stewart J . 2 7 acknowledged the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the d o c t r i n e t o searches conducted pursuant t o a warrant and concluded: What the " p l a i n view" cases have i n common i s t h a t the p o l i c e o f f i c e r i n each of them had a p r i o r j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r an i n t r u s i o n i n the course of which he came i n a d v e r t e n t l y a c r o s s a p i e c e o f evidence i n c r i m i n a t i n g the accused. The d o c t r i n e s e r v e s t o supplement the p r i o r j u s t i f i c a t i o n . . .and p e r m i t s the w a r r a n t l e s s s e i z u r e . 2 8 2 4 (1989) 50 C.C.C. (3d) 182, 99 N.R. 22. 2 5 I b i d , a t 188 C.C.C, 27 N.R. 26 ( 1 9 7 1 ) 29 L. Ed. (2d) 564. 2 7 Although Stewart J . d e l i v e r e d the Court's o p i n i o n , he was j o i n e d by o n l y Douglas, Brennan and M a r s h a l l , J J . w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h i s aspect. 2 8 Supra. n t . 26 a t 583. N e v e r t h e l e s s , Stewart J . noted t h a t the d o c t r i n e can o n l y apply t o the " i n a d v e r t e n t " d i s c o v e r y of e v i d e n c e 2 9 which i s "immediately apparent t o the p o l i c e . " 3 0 The r e a s o n i n g i n Coolidcre was accepted by f o u r members of the same Court i n Texas v. Brown. 3 1 a case noted by the Court of Appeal i n S o l v e n t Petroleum. There, the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of s. 231.3 of the Income Tax A c t 3 2 was i n i s s u e . I t was argued t h a t the p l a i n view d o c t r i n e c o u l d not apply t o the s e i z u r e of documents which n e c e s s a r i l y r e q u i r e d an examination b e f o r e a person r e a l i z e d t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n c e . In the course of h i s judgment, D e s j a r d i n s J.A., w r i t i n g f o r the Court, c o n s i d e r e d whether the search offended e i t h e r s. 7 or s. 8 of the C h a r t e r . He r e j e c t e d both arguments, c o n c l u d i n g : ...the context i n which the search f o r and s e i z u r e of " p l a i n view" documents appears i n the Act, i . e . . i n the course of s e a r c h i n g f o r and s e i z i n g business documents under a warrant which would o b v i o u s l y i n v o l v e examination of documents by the s e a r c h e r i n order t o determine whether the s e i z u r e i s a u t h o r i z e d by t h a t warrant, suggests t h a t the a u t h o r i t y t o s e i z e other business documents not covered by t h e warrant meets the t e s t of reasonableness and t h e r e f o r e of v a l i d i t y . In a d d i t i o n , the p r o v i s i o n as d r a f t e d meets the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l t e s t of reasonableness s i n c e i t c o n t a i n s two important safeguards: namely, t h a t the e x e c u t i n g o f f i c e r b e l i e v e s on r e a s o n a b l e grounds t h a t the document or t h i n g s e i z e d a f f o r d s 2 9 I b i d , a t 585. The f o r e g o i n g was accepted by S t e e l e J . i n R. v. Shea. (1982) 38 O.R. (2d) 582 (H.C.), as c o r r e c t l y s t a t i n g the law i n Canada, both pre and p o s t - C h a r t e r . See a l s o R. v. L o n a t i n (1983) 41 O.R. (2d) 545 (Ont. C A . ) and R o d e r i c k M. McLeod e t a l . , The Canadian C h a r t e r of R i g h t s - The P r o s e c u t i o n and Defence of C r i m i n a l and o t h e r S t a t u t o r y  O f f e n c e s , v o l . 2 (Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1983) a t 6-110.12 t o 6-114.1. 3 0 Supra. n t . 26 a t 583. 3 1 (1983) 75 L. Ed. (2d) 502. 3 2 S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63, as amended. evidence of the commission of an o f f e n c e under the A c t and t h a t , as soon as p r a c t i c a b l e , he b r i n g the s e i z e d matter b e f o r e a judge f o r j u d i c i a l c o n t r o l . 3 3 I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t o note t h a t d e s p i t e D e s j a r d i n s ' s f o o t n o t e r e f e r e n c e t o the Coolidqe and Brown requirement t h a t an item be "immediately apparent," he d i d not d i s c u s s i t i n the body of the d e c i s i o n . As a r e s u l t , the only, r a t h e r u n s a t i s f a c t o r y c o n c l u s i o n which can be drawn i s t h a t i n Canada "immediately apparent" should be taken t o mean 'immediately apparent upon examination.' Leave t o appeal S o l v e n t Petroleum was u n f o r t u n a t e l y r e f u s e d by the Supreme C o u r t , 3 4 f o r c i n g one t o s p e c u l a t e on the h i g h e s t c o u r t ' s views. S e c t i o n 231.3(5) of the Income Tax Act i s remarkably s i m i l a r t o the p o r t i o n of s. 462.32(1) under c o n s i d e r a t i o n . I t reads: Any person who executes a warrant under s u b s e c t i o n (1) may s e i z e , i n a d d i t i o n t o the document or t h i n g r e f e r r e d t o i n s u b s e c t i o n (1), any other document or t h i n g t h a t he b e l i e v e s  on reasonable grounds a f f o r d s evidence of the commission of an  o f f e n c e under t h i s A c t and s h a l l as soon as p r a c t i c a b l e b r i n g the document or t h i n g before, or make a r e p o r t i n r e s p e c t t h e r e o f t o , the judge who i s s u e d the warrant...[my emphasis]. The power i s broad, both i n terms of what a d d i t i o n a l items may be s e i z e d , " t h i n g [ s ] , " and i n terms of the o f f e n c e , "an o f f e n c e under t h i s A c t . " As a r e s u l t , the F e d e r a l Court's d e c i s i o n i s of tremendous importance t o the f u t u r e of s. 462.32(1). P a r a l l e l s t o the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l safeguards noted by the Court of Appeal i n S o l v e n t Petroleum can a l s o be found i n s. 462.32, where the s e i z u r e of unnamed p r o p e r t y r e q u i r e s a b e l i e f on r e a s o n a b l e grounds t h a t a c o n f i s c a t i o n order may be made and t h a t a r e p o r t be prepared f o r 3 3 Supra, n t . 24 a t 189 C.C.C, 28 N.R. 3 4 S.C.C, 21556, 23 Nov. 1989. the c o u r t . 5 In summary, i t may w e l l be t h a t Gold's concern w i t h s. 462.32 i s unwarranted. 3 6 Although a t f i r s t b l u s h i t appears c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y o f f e n s i v e , a c l o s e r examination r e v e a l s s t r o n g support from the Solvent Petroleum d e c i s i o n . Even i f the Supreme Court of Canada were t o d i s t i n g u i s h or o v e r r u l e the Court of Appeal's f i n d i n g s , the s p e c i a l search warrants are not n e c e s s a r i l y doomed. The Supreme Court c o u l d always c o n s i d e r 'reading down' 3 7 the l e g i s l a t i o n by e l i m i n a t i n g the o f f e n s i v e p o r t i o n of s. 462.32. 3 5 C r i m i n a l Code, s. 462.32(4). 3 6 S o l v e n t Petroleum may not have been d e c i d e d p r i o r t o Gold's comments going t o p r i n t . 3 7 C a r o l Rogerson notes t h a t r e a d i n g down i s "a means of a v o i d i n g a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s s u e . . . . a t e c h n i q u e of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n whereby a s t a t u t e i s narrowly c o n s t r u e d so as t o p r e c l u d e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a p p l i c a t i o n s " ("The J u d i c i a l Search f o r A p p r o p r i a t e Remedies Under the C h a r t e r : The Examples of Overbreadth and Vagueness," i n Robert J . Sharpe, ed. , C h a r t e r L i t i g a t i o n (Toronto: Butterworths, 1987) 233-306 a t 247) . In Hunter, Dickson J . c o n s i d e r e d whether t o read down the impugned combines l e g i s l a t i o n , c e n t r a l t o t h a t case. He had l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y r e j e c t i n g such a n o t i o n due t o the " o v e r t i n c o n s i s t e n c y " between the l e g i s l a t i o n and s. 8 (supra, nt. 11 a t 168 S.C.R., 115 C . C . C ) , however added t h a t : . . . i t i s the l e g i s l a t u r e ' s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o enact l e g i s l a t i o n t h a t embodies a p p r o p r i a t e safeguards t o comply wi t h the C o n s t i t u t i o n ' s requirements. I t should not f a l l t o the c o u r t s t o f i l l i n the d e t a i l s t h a t w i l l render l e g i s l a t i v e lacunae c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . Without a p p r o p r i a t e safeguards l e g i s l a t i o n a u t h o r i z i n g s e a r c h and s e i z u r e i s i n c o n s i s t e n t with s. 8 of the C h a r t e r . As I have s a i d , any law i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p r o v i s i o n s of the C o n s t i t u t i o n i s , t o the e x t e n t of the i n c o n s i s t e n c y , of no f o r c e or e f f e c t ( i b i d , a t 169 S.C.R., 115-16 C.C.C.). 96 The i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between s. 8 and s. 1 of the C h a r t e r remains t o be c o n s i d e r e d . In Hunter. an argument was not advanced t h a t the impugned l e g i s l a t i o n c o u l d be j u s t i f i e d under s. 1. Dickson, J . noted: I l e a v e t o another day the d i f f i c u l t q u e s t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between these two s e c t i o n s and, more p a r t i c u l a r l y , what f u r t h e r b a l a n c i n g of i n t e r e s t s , i f any, may be contemplated by s. 1, beyond t h a t envisaged by s. 8. 3 8 That day has y e t t o a r r i v e . S t u a r t Whitley notes the " i n h e r e n t c o n t r a d i c t i o n " of a search being unreasonable i n terms of s. 8, y e t a "reasonable l i m i t " under s. 1. At a minimum, he suggests t h a t the i l l e g a l i t y of a search "ought t o r a i s e a prima f a c i e presumption a g a i n s t i t s reasonableness." 3 9 Jerome A t r e n s observes, however, t h a t the Supreme Court of Canada's d e c i s i o n i n R. v. M o r g e n t a l e r . 4 0 which c o n s i d e r e d the i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p of a s. 7 v i o l a t i o n and s. 1, " i n f e r e n t i a l l y " r e j e c t e d any s u g g e s t i o n of a c o n t r a d i c t i o n by r e f u s i n g t o r e s t r i c t s. l ' s a p p l i c a t i o n t o a r i g h t or freedom which d i d not possess an i n t e r n a l l i m i t a t i o n or q u a l i f i c a t i o n . 4 1 3 8 Supra. n t . 11 a t 169-70 S.C.R., 116 C.C.C. 3 9 S t u a r t J . Whitley, C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e and the C o n s t i t u t i o n (Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989) a t 191, n.21 and 201. 4 0 (1988) 62 C R . (3d) 1, 37 C.C.C. (3d) 449. 4 1 Jerome At r e n s , The Charter and C r i m i n a l Procedure (Toronto: Butterworths, 1989) a t 1-34. CONFISCATION AND THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE - SECTION 11(d) As noted i n Chapter Two, the aims of the l e g i s l a t i o n are l a r g e l y s a t i s f i e d upon s e i z u r e or r e s t r a i n t of the o f f e n d i n g p r o p e r t y or proceeds of crime. N e v e r t h e l e s s , c o n f i s c a t i o n remains a c r u c i a l f i n a l element i n the process and the means by which an o f f e n d e r i s f o r e c l o s e d a b s o l u t e l y of h i s i l l - g o t t e n g a i n s . In or d e r t o a p p r e c i a t e the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the C h a r t e r ' s p o t e n t i a l impact on the c o n f i s c a t i o n p r o v i s i o n s , a review o f the presumption of innocence, entrenched by s. 11(d) of the C h a r t e r , i s e s s e n t i a l . There are few, i f any, aspects of our c r i m i n a l law which possess g r e a t e r s a n c t i t y than the presumption of innocence. V i s c o u n t Sankey L.C. i n Woolminqton v. P.P.P.. d e s c r i b e d i t as the "golden t h r e a d " running "[t]hroughout the web of the E n g l i s h C r i m i n a l Law." 4 2 S e c t i o n 11(d) of the Ch a r t e r makes i t an i n t e g r a l p a r t of Canada's C o n s t i t u t i o n , a l e g a l r i g h t enjoyed by a l l persons "charged w i t h an o f f e n c e . . . t o be presumed innocent u n t i l proven g u i l t y a c c o r d i n g t o law..." The presumption i s c e n t r a l t o the l e g a l r i g h t s c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n the C h a r t e r : The Canadian c o u r t s have i n the case of t h i s " l e g a l r i g h t " , perhaps more so than i n the case of any oth e r , s e i z e d the o p p o r t u n i t y a f f o r d e d by the enactment of the C h a r t e r t o r e s t o r e a h i g h e r l e v e l of p r i n c i p l e t o the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the r i g h t , a f t e r decades of ad hoc t i n k e r i n g w i t h the presumption of innocence by Parliament and the p r o v i n c i a l l e g i s l a t u r e s . 4 3 4 2 [1935] A.C. 462 a t 481, 25 Cr. App. R. 72 a t 95 (H.L.). 4 3 Supra, n t . 10 a t 470. 98 As w i t h s. 8, s. 11(d) has s t r o n g American t i e s . Both the F i f t h and the Fourteenth Amendments t o the C o n s t i t u t i o n p r o v i d e f o r "due p r o c e s s , " a term deemed t o i n c l u d e the presumption of innocence and the need i n c r i m i n a l cases f o r p r o o f beyond a re a s o n a b l e doubt of a person's g u i l t . 4 4 The burden of pr o o f i s i n t e g r a l t o the presumption of innocence. In R. v. Oakes. 4 5 Dickson C.J.C., w r i t i n g f o r the m a j o r i t y , e s t a b l i s h e d a t h r e e - p o i n t t e s t t o an a l y z e s i t u a t i o n s f o r compliance w i t h s. 11(d). F i r s t , t o s u s t a i n a c r i m i n a l c o n v i c t i o n t h e r e must be p r o o f beyond a rea s o n a b l e doubt. Second, the burden of e s t a b l i s h i n g g u i l t i s on the Crown and t h i r d , the c o u r t must proceed i n a l a w f u l and f a i r manner. 4 6 He went on: In g e n e r a l one must, I t h i n k , conclude t h a t a p r o v i s i o n which r e q u i r e s an accused t o d i s p r o v e on a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s the e x i s t e n c e of a presumed f a c t , which i s an important element of the o f f e n c e i n qu e s t i o n , v i o l a t e s t h e presumption of innocence. . , 4 7 Most of the pre - C h a r t e r " t i n k e r i n g " by P a r l i a m e n t w i t h the presumption of innocence i n v o l v e d the c r e a t i o n of an i m b r o g l i o of c o m p l e x i t i e s , v a r i o u s l y r e f e r r e d t o as r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e s , i n f e r e n c e s and presumptions. They are t o be found everywhere 4 8 and 4 4 I b i d , a t 467. 4 5 [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103, 24 C.C.C. (3d) 321. 4 6 I b i d , a t 121 S.C.R. , 334-35 C.C.C. 4 7 I b i d , a t 132 S.C.R., 343 C.C.C. 4 8 W r i t i n g i n 1986, Byron S h e l d r i c k counted i n excess of 90 r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e s ( " S h i f t i n g Burdens and Required I n f e r e n c e s : The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of Reverse Onus C l a u s e s " 99 t h e i r importance t o a s u c c e s s f u l p r o s e c u t i o n extends along a continuum from minimal t o c r i t i c a l . McDonald d e f i n e s a r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e as "one which p l a c e s the l e g a l burden of proof upon the accused as t o some f a c t which i s an i n g r e d i e n t of the o f f e n c e . " 4 9 He t r e a t s the words i n f e r e n c e and presumption as synonymous, however d i f f e r e n t i a t e s among r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e s by the nature of the burden p l a c e d on an accused. In Oak.es. Dickson C.J.C. grappled w i t h the r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e found i n s. 8 of the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l Act, one r e q u i r i n g an accused charged under t h a t s e c t i o n t o d i s p r o v e p o s s e s s i o n f o r the purpose of t r a f f i c k i n g once shown t o have been i n p o s s e s s i o n of a n a r c o t i c . In l a y i n g the groundwork f o r h i s d e c i s i o n , the C h i e f J u s t i c e c a t e g o r i z e d presumptions as those "without b a s i c f a c t s " and those "with": A presumption without a b a s i c f a c t i s simply a c o n c l u s i o n which i s t o be drawn u n t i l the c o n t r a r y i s proved. A presumption w i t h a b a s i c f a c t e n t a i l s a c o n c l u s i o n t o be drawn upon p r o o f of the b a s i c f a c t . . . 5 0 The l a t t e r he s u b d i v i d e d i n t o p e r m i s s i v e and mandatory presumptions, the former making the drawing of an i n f e r e n c e o p t i o n a l , the l a t t e r not. 5 1 He a l s o noted t h a t presumptions can "be e i t h e r r e b u t t a b l e or i r r e b u t t a b l e . " To rebut the former, one must e i t h e r r a i s e a reasonable doubt, adducing evidence which (1986) 44 U. of Toronto Fac. L. Rev. 179-208 a t 179). 4 9 Supra, n t . 10 a t 471. 5 0 Supra, n t . 45 a t 115 S.C.R., 330 C.C.C. 5 1 I b i d , a t 115-16 S.C.R., 330 C.C.C. 100 q u e s t i o n s the t r u t h of the presumed f a c t , or adduce s u f f i c i e n t e vidence t o s a t i s f y the c i v i l burden. In a d d i t i o n , presumptions can be of law or of f a c t . 5 2 A p p l y i n g the f o r e g o i n g , Dickson concluded t h a t the impugned p o r t i o n of s. 8 c o n s t i t u t e d a mandatory presumption of law r e s u l t i n g from the proof of a b a s i c f a c t , p o s s e s s i o n , which c o u l d be r e b u t t e d by evidence s u f f i c i e n t t o s a t i s f y the balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t . 5 3 He d i s t i n g u i s h e d e a r l i e r d e c i s i o n s which viewed s. 8 as merely s h i f t i n g an e v i d e n t i a r y or secondary burden onto the accused, o b s e r v i n g t h a t the phrase " t o e s t a b l i s h , " used i n s. 8, i s the e q u i v a l e n t of "to prove." 5 4 A p p l y i n g C h i e f J u s t i c e Dickson's t e s t i n Oakes t o the net worth i n f e r e n c e i n s. 462.39 i n v i t e s the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t i t i s a 'b a s i c f a c t presumption' which r e l i e s upon proof of an unex p l a i n e d i n c r e a s e i n net worth. The f a c t t h a t the c o u r t i s g i v e n the o p t i o n of i n f e r r i n g t h a t t h i s i n c r e a s e i s the proceeds of crime c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e s t h a t i t i s a pe r m i s s i v e , not a mandatory presumption, as i n Oakes. Furthermore, i t s p e r m i s s i v e nature i m p l i e s t h a t i t i s a l s o r e b u t t a b l e , presumably by the accused adducing s u f f i c i e n t e vidence t o q u e s t i o n the v e r a c i t y of the presumed f a c t . Determining whether i t i s a presumption of f a c t or law i s r e s o l v e d by r e f e r e n c e t o "Cross on Evidence," a t e x t t o which Dickson r e f e r r e d i n Oakes. Cross w r i t e s t h a t "[p]resumptions of f a c t are 5 2 I b i d , a t 116 S.C.R. , 330-31 C.C.C. 5 3 I b i d , a t 116 S.C.R., 331 C.C.C. 5 4 I b i d , a t 117 S.C.R., 332 C.C.C. 101 merely f r e q u e n t l y r e c u r r i n g examples of c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence.... i n f e r e n c e s which may be drawn by the t r i b u n a l of f a c t . " 5 5 In summary, the net worth i n f e r e n c e i s a p e r m i s s i v e presumption of f a c t , r e b u t t a b l e by c a l l i n g i n t o q u e s t i o n the presumed f a c t . T h i s i s i n accord with the p r e s e n t U n i t e d S t a t e s p o s i t i o n r e g a r d i n g a s i m i l a r p r o v i s i o n i n i t s drug c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n . In U.S. v. S a n d i n i . 5 6 the F e d e r a l Court of Appeals noted t h a t : I f the p r o s e c u t i o n shows t h a t a defendant a c q u i r e d p r o p e r t y d u r i n g the r e l e v a n t p e r i o d and t h a t i t l i k e l y came from no o t h e r source, the f a c t f i n d e r may i n f e r t h a t the drug t r a f f i c k i n g funded the purchase. The presumption, t o be sure, i s a r e b u t t a b l e one and t h e r e f o r e i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . N e v e r t h e l e s s the, the r i g h t of r e b u t t a l may be i l l u s o r y when made c o n t i n g e n t on waiving the p r i v i l e g e not t o t e s t i f y d u r i n g the t r i a l . " Can the net worth i n f e r e n c e s u r v i v e a C h a r t e r c h a l l e n g e ? In Oajkes, the C h i e f J u s t i c e concluded " t h a t a p r o v i s i o n which r e q u i r e s an accused t o d i s p r o v e on a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s the e x i s t e n c e of a presumed f a c t , which i s an important element of the o f f e n c e i n q u e s t i o n , v i o l a t e s the presumption of innocence i n s. 1 1 ( d ) . " 5 8 He r e j e c t e d the n o t i o n t h a t a r a t i o n a l c o n n e c t i o n between an i n f e r r e d f a c t and a proved f a c t n e c e s s a r i l y assured t h a t p r o o f was 5 5 Rupert Cross, Evidence. 5th ed. (London: Butterworths, 1979) a t 124. 5 6 (1987) 816 F. (2d) 869 (U.S.C.A., 3rd C i r . ) . 5 7 I b i d , a t 874. One u n d e s i r a b l e r e s u l t of r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e s i s the p r e s s u r e p l a c e d upon an accused t o take the stand i n h i s own defence. For t h i s reason, the r i g h t a g a i n s t s e l f - c r i m i n a t i o n , s. 13 of the Charter, i s a l s o g e n e r a l l y r e l i e d upon i n the c h a l l e n g e of a r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e . 5 8 Supra. n t . 45 a t 132 S.C.R., 343 C.C.C. 102 e s t a b l i s h e d beyond a reasonable doubt and t h a t a p r o v i s i o n d i d not thereby o f f e n d s. 1 1 ( d ) . 5 9 The p e r m i s s i v e and e v i d e n t i a r y nature of the net worth i n f e r e n c e , the f a c t t h a t i t does not r e l a t e t o an element of an o f f e n c e and the p o s s i b i l i t y of r e b u t t i n g i t on a s t a n d a r d l e s s than a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s , make i t h i g h l y u n l i k e l y t h a t the i n f e r e n c e w i l l f a i l a s. 11(d) Charter c h a l l e n g e . As noted i n Chapter Two, the g r e a t e s t problem with the i n f e r e n c e w i l l l i k e l y be t h e mechanics of c o m p i l a t i o n . Although the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of the net worth i n f e r e n c e may be of l i t t l e concern, such i s not the case w i t h o t h e r aspects of the c o n f i s c a t i o n scheme. I n t r o d u c t i o n of the balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t i n s. 462.37 seems, a t f i r s t b l u s h , t o c o n t r a d i c t the requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt which forms the c o r n e r s t o n e of the presumption of innocence and s. 11(d). The i s s u e i s complicated, however, because i t does not i n v o l v e a q u e s t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l g u i l t but of t a i n t a t t a c h e d t o property, much as the deodand of a n c i e n t times. I t i s f u r t h e r complicated by s. 462.37(3), which a l l o w s a c o u r t t o s u b s t i t u t e a f i n e of e q u i v a l e n t worth f o r p r o p e r t y which i s not e x i g i b l e and 462.37(4) , which r e q u i r e s a mandatory p e r i o d of imprisonment i n d e f a u l t . C e r t a i n o b s e r v a t i o n s can be made. The Supreme Court of Canada, i n R v. G a r d i n e r , 6 0 c l e a r l y s t a t e d t h a t a s e n t e n c i n g 5 9 I b i d , a t 133-34 S.C.R., 344 C.C.C. He d i d a l l o w t h a t the " r a t i o n a l c o n n e c t i o n t e s t " c o u l d u s e f u l l y be a p p l i e d a t the s. 1 stage. 6 0 [1982] 2 S.C.R. 368, 68 C.C.C. (2d) 477. 103 p r o c e e d i n g i s an i n t e g r a l p a r t of the t r i a l p r o c e s s . The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal agreed i n R. v. P r o t z , 6 1 n o t i n g t h a t s e n t e n c i n g does not f a l l w i t h i n the d e f i n i t i o n of "other p r o c e e d i n g [ s ] 1 1 i n s. 13 of the C h a r t e r • 6 2 As a r e s u l t , a s e n t e n c i n g h e a r i n g r e q u i r e s t h a t the onus of p r o o f , a t l e a s t w i t h r e s p e c t t o a l l c o n t e s t e d i s s u e s , r e s t s w i t h the Crown, which must s a t i s f y a burden t h a t i s beyond a reasonable doubt. 6 3 Does i t f o l l o w though t h a t a c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g i s the e q u i v a l e n t of a s e n t e n c i n g hearing? With a long h i s t o r y of c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n and r e l a t e d j u r i s p r u d e n c e , American c o u r t s can h e l p with the r e s o l u t i o n of t h i s i s s u e , m i n d f u l always of Dickson J.'s admonition i n G a r d i n e r , a p r e - C h a r t e r case, t h a t : Due p r o c e s s bears a very d i f f e r e n t meaning i n Canada than t h a t which has been accorded the phrase i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , and consequently American j u r i s p r u d e n c e w i t h r e s p e c t t o the proper quantum of proof on sentencing i s an i n a p p r o p r i a t e model f o r Canadian emulation. The c o n t r o v e r s y s u r r o u n d i n g the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the due process c l a u s e t o s e n t e n c i n g h e a r i n g s has served t o accentuate, i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s , the d i v i s i o n i n the t r i a l process before and a f t e r c o n v i c t i o n . 6 4 6 1 (1984) 13 C.C.C. (2d) 107. 6 2 I b i d , a t 112. 6 3 See W i l l i a m F. Ehrcke, " L e t t i n g the Punishment F i t the Crime," (1990) 48 The Advocate 545 a t 551-52. There i s no requirement t h a t the c o u r t c o n s i d e r o n l y f r e s h evidence i n a c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g . As a r e s u l t , i t may wish t o c o n s i d e r evidence r e c e i v e d d u r i n g the ' g u i l t ' phase. 6 4 Supra, n t . 60 a t 412-13 S.C.R., 513 C.C.C. I t w i l l be i n t e r e s t i n g t o observe whether the C h a r t e r f w i t h i t s s t r o n g s i m i l a r i t y t o the American C o n s t i t u t i o n , causes a change i n t h i s t h i n k i n g . 104 Regardless, the p a r a l l e l s between American c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n and the amendments are s t r i k i n g and cannot be ignored. In S a n d i n i , 6 5 the Court of Appeals acknowledged the d e s i r a b i l i t y of merging the c o n f i s c a t i o n process with the t r i a l proper, warning however of "the p o t e n t i a l f o r c l a s h e s between competing c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r i g h t s . " The Court adopted a b i f u r c a t e d procedure i n which "the v e r d i c t i n the g u i l t phase must be based on adequate evidence and a standard of proof beyond a reas o n a b l e doubt." 6 6 The Court observed t h a t a s i m i l a r burden i n the c o n f i s c a t i o n phase "confuses c u l p a b i l i t y w i t h consequences." 6 7 I t reviewed other s t a t u t e s which reduced the burden t o the c i v i l t e s t i n cases of "enhanced p e n a l t i e s " and concluded: The l e g i s l a t i v e h i s t o r y makes c l e a r t h a t Congress sought t o make the government's burden of proof i n c r i m i n a l f o r f e i t u r e s the same as t h a t i n the c i v i l realm. Such a p r o v i s i o n i s v a l i d t o the extent t h a t the f o r f e i t u r e p r o c e e d i n g o c c u r s o n l y a f t e r a c o n v i c t i o n based on the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l standard....we conclude t h a t use of the preponderance s t a n d a r d o n l y t o e s t a b l i s h the extent of the p e n a l t y withstands c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s c r u t i n y . 6 8 In G a r d i n e r . Dickson J . noted t h a t the c o n t r o v e r s y over due p r o c e s s i n the Un i t e d S t a t e s accentuated an u n d e s i r a b l e r i f t between the g u i l t and sentencing phases of a t r i a l , l e a v i n g one t o s p e c u l a t e whether a b i f u r c a t e d process, such as t h a t contemplated by the amendments, w i l l f i n d favour i n Canada. Supra. n t . 56. I b i d , a t 874. I b i d , a t 875. I b i d , a t 876. 105 S e c t i o n 11(d) c o u l d a l s o a s s i s t w i t h c h a l l e n g e s t o the v i a b i l i t y of s. 462.37(2), which permits the c o n f i s c a t i o n of proceeds of crime unconnected t o a p r e d i c a t e o f f e n c e . There the c r i m i n a l burden of proof remains, however, t h e l a c k of a nexus r a i s e s i n t e r e s t i n g problems. 6 9 In a d d i t i o n , the s. 462.37(4) requirement t h a t a c o u r t impose a p e r i o d of imprisonment i n d e f a u l t , r a n g i n g up t o 10 years, i n v i t e s c h a l l e n g e under both s. 11(d) and oth e r Charter p r o v i s i o n s . 7 0 In rem c o n f i s c a t i o n under s. 462.38 can be added t o the l i s t of unknowns. The i m p l i c a t i o n s of c o n f i s c a t i n g a person's p r o p e r t y i n the absence of a c o n v i c t i o n and, q u i t e p o s s i b l y without any n o t i c e , are tremendous. Although p o t e n t i a l l y s. 11(d) i s s u e s , c h a l l e n g e s t o any of s. 462.37(2), s. 462.37(4) and s. 462.38(2) c o u l d p o t e n t i a l l y o b t a i n even g r e a t e r success i f framed around s. 7 of the Ch a r t e r . FUNDAMENTAL JUSTICE - SECTION 7 S e c t i o n 7, commonly r e f e r r e d t o as the fundamental j u s t i c e p r o v i s i o n of the Chart e r . i s c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o the presumption of innocence. As noted by the C h i e f J u s t i c e i n Oakes: ...the presumption of innocence i s r e f e r a b l e and i n t e g r a l t o the g e n e r a l p r o t e c t i o n of l i f e , l i b e r t y and s e c u r i t y of the 6 9 For example, i s a c r i m i n a l courtroom the proper forum f o r a p r o c e e d i n g u n r e l a t e d t o the o f f e n c e charged? Should t h e r e not be a c i v i l f o r f e i t u r e scheme e s t a b l i s h e d by s t a t u t e ? 7 0 For example, s. 7 (fundamental j u s t i c e ) , s. 9 ( a r b i t r a r y d e t e n t i o n ) and s. 12 ( c r u e l and unusual punishment). 106 person c o n t a i n e d i n s. 7 of the C h a r t e r . 7 1 S e c t i o n 7 of the Charter i s t o c r i m i n a l law what a w i l d c a r d i s t o an i n v e t e r a t e c a r d p l a y e r . The c o u r t s t r e a t i t w i t h heady r e s p e c t and l e g a l academics and p r a c t i t i o n e r s are l e f t t o s p e c u l a t e on i t s p o t e n t i a l . Although r e l a t i v e l y c o n c i s e , every word i n the s e c t i o n i s s i g n i f i c a n t : Everyone has the r i g h t t o l i f e , l i b e r t y and s e c u r i t y of the person and the r i g h t not t o be d e p r i v e d t h e r e o f except i n accordance w i t h the p r i n c i p l e s of fundamental j u s t i c e . Jerome Atre n s d e s c r i b e s the s. 7's p r e s e n t and p o t e n t i a l e f f e c t on Canada's c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system i n the f o l l o w i n g terms: The wording of the s e c t i o n i n v i t e s broad, c r e a t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . The c o u r t s have o n l y begun the t a s k of e x p l o r i n g the meaning and p o t e n t i a l of s. 7, but i t s p r e -eminence among the l e g a l r i g h t s has a l r e a d y been e s t a b l i s h e d . 7 2 In Ref. r e s. 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.).73 Lamer J . (as he then was) , w r i t i n g f o r the m a j o r i t y of the Supreme Court, e x p l a i n e d t h a t the s e c t i o n c o n t a i n s two d i s t i n c t y e t complementary p a r t s , s e p a r a t e d by a d i s j u n c t i v e 'and.' The former evidences "the i n t e r e s t s p r o t e c t e d , " while the l a t t e r " s e t s out l i m i t s or a c c e p t a b l e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of t h i s r i g h t . " What i s i n t e r e s t i n g , however, i s h i s c o n c l u s i o n t h a t s. 7 can p r o v i d e r e l i e f from both s u b s t a n t i v e and p r o c e d u r a l i n j u s t i c e s , not simply the former, as i n Supra, n t . 45 a t 119 S.C.R., 333 C.C.C. Supra. n t . 41 a t 8-1. (1985) 23 C.C.C. (3d) 289. the case of the American due process c l a u s e s . 7 4 Jamie Cameron tak e s aim a t h i s reasoning, lambasting i t f o r g l o s s i n g over two hundred y e a r s of e x t e n s i v e American j u r i s p r u d e n c e . He concludes t h a t as a r e s u l t of Lamer's a n a l y s i s , "the Supreme Court of Canada committed i t s e l f t o an expansive i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of s e c t i o n 7, w i t h o u t e x p l a i n i n g or appearing t o r e a l i z e the r a m i f i c a t i o n s of such a d e c i s i o n . " 7 5 A c c e p t i n g t h a t the Supreme Court has taken the broad wording of s. 7 t o h e a r t , the next q u e s t i o n must be t o determine what c r i t e r i a c o u r t s w i l l u t l i z e i n order t o determine whether or not a s. 7 v i o l a t i o n has occurred. Lamer J.'s reasons i n the Motor  Vehicle Act (B.C.) r e f e r e n c e are again i n s t r u c t i v e . The p r i n c i p l e s of fundamental j u s t i c e , he w r i t e s , "are t o be found i n the b a s i c t e n e t s of our l e g a l system." These t e n e t s i n c l u d e the enumerated r i g h t s and freedoms found w i t h i n s e c t i o n s 8 t o 14 but a l s o c e r t a i n presumptions i n the common law and p r i n c i p l e s annunciated by i n t e r n a t i o n a l conventions of human r i g h t s . 7 6 The p o t e n t i a l f o r the s e c t i o n i s immense. One amendment which may prove f e r t i l e t e r r i t o r y f o r a s . 7 c h a l l e n g e i s the new o f f e n c e of 'laundering proceeds of crime.' Is the o f f e n c e d e l i n e a t e d i n s. 462.31 o v e r l y broad, t o the p o i n t of b e i n g too vague t o support a f i n d i n g of c r i m i n a l conduct? In R. v. 7 4 Jamie Cameron, "The Motor V e h i c l e Reference and the Relevance of American D o c t r i n e i n C h a r t e r A d j u d i c a t i o n , " Sharpe, supra, nt. 37, 69-96 a t 70. 7 5 I b i d , a t 89. 7 6 Supra. n t . 73 a t 3 02 and Atrens, supra. n t . 41 a t 8-24. 108 Rowley. 7 7 the B r i t i s h Columbia Court of Appeal t u r n e d t o American j u r i s p r u d e n c e f o r a t e s t t o determine when a s t a t u t o r y p r o v i s i o n i s v o i d f o r vagueness, c o n c l u d i n g t h a t a c h a l l e n g e c o u l d o n l y succeed " i f the enactment i s i m p e r m i s s i b l y vague i n a l l of i t s a p p l i c a t i o n s . " Can i t be s a i d t h a t s. 462.31 i s i m p e r m i s s i b l y vague i n a l l i t s a p p l i c a t i o n s ? C a r o l Rogerson d e s c r i b e s "overbroad" laws as those "which are t o o b r o a d l y d r a f t e d and which, i f a p p l i e d l i t e r a l l y , have the p o t e n t i a l t o c a t c h more conduct than the government i s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y p e r m i t t e d i n the p u r s u i t of i t s l e g i t i m a t e g o a l s . " 7 8 Overbroad laws are o f t e n a l s o plagued by 'vagueness, 1 which Rogerson d e s c r i b e s as "the problem of i m p r e c i s i o n and u n c e r t a i n t y . " 7 9 The common t e s t f o r vagueneness i s whether "a law i s so u n c e r t a i n t h a t a ' w e l l - i n t e n t i o n e d ' c i t i z e n of common i n t e l l i g e n c e must n e c e s s a r i l y guess a t i t s meaning." 8 0 Vagueness o f f e n d s the p r i n c i p l e of l e g a l i t y , which p r o v i d e s n o t i c e t o the p u b l i c of the content of law. Rogerson notes t h a t vague laws may now possess c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s i g n i f i c a n c e : . . . t o the extent t h a t they c o n s t i t u t e a d e n i a l of f a i r n o t i c e a p e n a l context, they may v i o l a t e the s. 7 guarantee of fundamental j u s t i c e ; they may be p o t e n t i a l l y overbroad (and hence "unreasonable" w i t h i n the context of s. 1) ; o r , they may v i o l a t e the requirement i n s. 1 t h a t l i m i t a t i o n s on r i g h t s be " (1986) 43 M.V.R. 290. 7 8 Rogerson, supra. nt. 37 a t 241. 7 9 I b i d , a t 242. 8 0 I b i d . 109 p r e s c r i b e d by law. 8 1 Rogerson notes t h a t the remedies f o r vague and overbroad laws i n c l u d i n g s t r i k i n g the e n t i r e law, r e a d i n g down and s e v e r a n c e . 8 2 As much remains t o be known of the f u l l b readth and ex t e n t of the r i g h t s p r o t e c t e d by s. 7, i t i s d i f f i c u l t t o p r e d i c t i t s impact on c r i m i n a l law and, s p e c i f i c a l l y , i t s a b i l i t y t o a s s i s t c h a l l e n g e s based p r i m a r i l y on other enumerated r i g h t s . In a d d i t i o n , the a v a i l a b i l i t y of recourse t o s. 1 from s. 7 v i o l a t i o n s , which i s contemplated by the m a j o r i t y i n Morgentaler, c l e a r l y . d e m o n s t r a t e s a complex i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p between the p r i n c i p l e s o f fundamental j u s t i c e and the reasonable l i m i t s t o be p l a c e d on r i g h t s and freedoms. THE FINAL HURDLE - SECTION 1 Assuming, f o r the sake of argument, the v i o l a t i o n of a l e g a l r i g h t by o p e r a t i o n of one or more of the proceeds of crime amendments, the c o u r t must next examine the i n f r i n g e m e n t i n terms of s. I , 8 3 which p r o v i d e s the u l t i m a t e b a l a n c i n g of i n d i v i d u a l 8 1 I b i d , a t 244-45. 8 2 I b i d , a t 245. 8 3 R. v. B i g M Drug Mart L t d . [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295 i s a u t h o r i t y f o r t h i s two-stage process which Kerans J.A. d e s c r i b e s as "a dichotomy between l i m i t s on r i g h t s t h a t s p r i n g from t h e i r nature and purpose, what we might c a l l d e f i n i t i o n a l l i m i t , and l i m i t s on r i g h t s t h a t flow from the r e c o g n i t i o n of competing c l a i m s , the assessment of which seems t o be the o f f i c e of s. 1" ( i n f r a , n t . 84 a t 569). 110 r i g h t s w i t h m a j o r i t a r i a n or communitarian i n t e r e s t s . I t s t a t e s : The Canadian Charter of R i g h t s and Freedoms guarantees the r i g h t s and freedoms s e t out i n i t s u b j e c t o n l y t o such r e a s o n a b l e l i m i t s p r e s c r i b e d by law as can be demonstrably j u s t i f i e d i n a f r e e and democratic s o c i e t y . 8 4 In Oakes. C h i e f J u s t i c e Dickson d e l i n e a t e d two c r i t e r i a which must be s a t i s f i e d i n order f o r a c h a l l e n g e t o succeed under s. 1. Quoting from B i g M. the f i r s t c r i t e r i o n r e q u i r e s t h a t the o b j e c t i v e of the l e g i s l a t i o n be "of s u f f i c i e n t importance t o warrant o v e r r i d i n g a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y p r o t e c t e d freedom." 8 5 A t a minimum, the o b j e c t i v e must be " p r e s s i n g and s u b s t a n t i a l i n a f r e e and democratic s o c i e t y . " The second r e q u i r e s " t h a t the means chosen are r e a s o n a b l e and demonstrably j u s t i f i e d . " Again a d o p t i n g d i c t a from B i g M, he notes t h a t t h i s " i n v o l v e s 'a form of p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y t e s t . 1 " 8 6 In t u r n the p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y t e s t i n c o r p o r a t e s t h r e e sub-t e s t s . F i r s t , t h e r e must be a r a t i o n a l c o n n e c t i o n between the measures and the o b j e c t i v e . Second, the means "shou l d impair 'as l i t t l e as p o s s i b l e ' the r i g h t or freedom i n q u e s t i o n " 8 7 and t h i r d , the e f f e c t s of the measures must be p r o p o r t i o n a l t o the o b j e c t i v e , " [ t ] h e more severe the d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t s of a measure, the more important the o b j e c t i v e must be." 8 8 8 4 For a f r a n k d i s c u s s i o n of s. 1 and i t s f u t u r e i m p l i c a t i o n s by a l e a d i n g Canadian j u r i s t , see Roger P. Kerans, "The Future of S e c t i o n One of the C h a r t e r , " (1989) 23 U.B.C. Law Rev. 567-77. 8 5 Supra. n t . 45 a t 138 S.C.R. 8 6 I b i d , a t 139. 8 7 I b i d . 8 8 I b i d , a t 140. I l l The f i r s t c r i t e r i o n e x p l o r e s the p u b l i c purpose of the impugned l e g i s l a t i o n . Oakes p r o v i d e s the best and a s u r p r i s i n g l y r e l e v a n t example. There, Dickson had l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y f i n d i n g a l e g i t i m a t e purpose. I m p l i c i t l y acknowledging the Crown's c o n t e n t i o n t h a t " s . 8 of the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t i s aimed a t c u r b i n g drug t r a f f i c k i n g by f a c i l i t a t i n g the c o n v i c t i o n of drug t r a f f i c k e r s [Dickson's words]," he observed t h a t "Parliament's concern t h a t drug t r a f f i c k i n g be decreased can be c h a r a c t e r i z e d as s u b s t a n t i a l and p r e s s i n g . " 8 9 He c i t e d two r e p o r t s , 9 0 v a r i o u s i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r e a t i e s 9 1 and f o r e i g n domestic l e g i s l a t i o n 9 2 aimed a t the drug problem, c o n c l u d i n g t h a t : The o b j e c t i v e of p r o t e c t i n g our s o c i e t y from the grave i l l s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h drug t r a f f i c k i n g , i s , . . . o n e of s u f f i c i e n t importance t o warrant o v e r r i d i n g a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y p r o t e c t e d r i g h t or freedom i n c e r t a i n cases. Moreover, the degree of s e r i o u s n e s s of drug t r a f f i c k i n g makes i t s acknowledgement as a s u f f i c i e n t l y important o b j e c t i v e f o r the purposes of s. 1, t o a l a r g e extent, s e l f - e v i d e n t . 9 3 The absence of any c u r r e n t a n a l y s i s of the s t a t e of drug t r a f f i c k i n g i n Canada i s a s u r p r i s i n g omission from Dickson's 8 9 I b i d . 9 0 A s p e c i a l Senate committee r e p o r t from 1955 and the F i n a l  Report of the Commission of I n q u i r y i n t o the Non-Medical Use  of Drugs (the 'LeDain Commission' r e p o r t ) of 1973. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , the author of the LeDain Commission r e p o r t , G e r a l d LeDain, s a t on the Oakes case i n h i s c a p a c i t y as a pui s n e j u s t i c e of the S.C.C. and concurred w i t h Dickson's judgment. 9 1 A l l pre-1965. 9 2 A New Zealand s t a t u t e of 1975 and a U.K. s t a t u t e o f 1971. Supra. n t . 45 a t 141 S.C.R., 350 C.C.C. 112 judgment. Furthermore, with the e x c e p t i o n of the 1973 LeDain Commission r e p o r t , t h e r e i s no r e f e r e n c e t o hard s t a t i s t i c s on drug abuse. C l e a r l y , t o the Supreme Court, which was unanimous i n t h i s a s p e c t of the judgment, the e v i l s of drug t r a f f i c k i n g r e q u i r e d l i t t l e e l a b o r a t i o n . W i l l the same apply t o money l a u n d e r i n g and a s s e t c o n f i s c a t i o n ? Having accepted the ends of the l e g i s l a t i o n , the C h i e f J u s t i c e t u r n e d t o the means. He began h i s a n a l y s i s w i t h the f i r s t prong of the p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y t e s t - the r a t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p t o the o b j e c t i v e . Expounding on the nature of the s u b - t e s t , he noted the need f o r an i n t e r n a l r a t i o n a l i t y between what had been proven by the Crown and what i t sought t o prove through the a s s i s t a n c e of s. 8's r e v e r s e onus c l a u s e . He concluded t h a t the c l a u s e c o u l d not s u r v i v e t h i s " r a t i o n a l connection t e s t " : ... i t would be i r r a t i o n a l t o i n f e r t h a t t h a t a person had an i n t e n t t o t r a f f i c on the b a s i s of h i s or her p o s s e s s i o n of a s m a l l q u a n t i t y of n a r c o t i c s . The p r e s u m p t i o n . . . i s o v e r i n c l u s i v e and c o u l d l e a d t o r e s u l t s i n c e r t a i n cases which would defy both r a t i o n a l i t y and f a i r n e s s . 9 4 The s e v e r i t y of punishment which p o t e n t i a l l y f lows from a c o n v i c t i o n under s. 8 added t o the s t r e n g t h of h i s commitment. 9 5 S i n c e Oakes. the Supreme Court has had the o p p o r t u n i t y of c o n s i d e r i n g the p r o p o r t i o n a l i t y t e s t i n other cases, among them R. v. Smith 9 6 and R. v. Morqentaler. In the former, the seven year minimum sentence f o r drug i m p o r t a t i o n f a i l e d the second prong of 9 4 I b i d , a t 142 S.C.R., 350 C.C.C. 9 5 I b i d . 9 6 (1987) 34 C.C.C. (3d) 97. 113 the t e s t and i n the l a t t e r , Dickson C.J.C. determined t h a t the impugned a b o r t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n f a i l e d t o s a t i s f y any of i t s elements. 9 7 A p p l y i n g Oakes t o the proceeds of crime amendments w i l l not be a one-time e f f o r t . In r e c e n t months and y e a r s , money l a u n d e r i n g and the p r o f i t s of the i l l i c i t drug t r a d e have c a p t u r e d h e a d l i n e s i n newspapers and magazines throughout Canada and the U n i t e d S t a t e s . S t a t i s t i c s abound concerning the ex t e n t of both i n North America, t h e i r p r e v a l e n c e i n c e r t a i n p o p u l a t i o n c e n t r e s and the d e s i r a b i l i t y of n e u t r a l i z i n g drug c a r t e l s by a t t a c k i n g t h e i r p r o f i t s . In view of the Supreme Court's w i l l i n g n e s s t o a c c e p t t h a t drug t r a f f i c k i n g i s an e v i l , i t w i l l h a r d l y be a quantum l e a p f o r i t t o s i m i l a r l y acknowledge the e v i l s of l a u n d e r i n g drug monies and of drug p r o f i t e e r i n g g e n e r a l l y . However, t h i s assumes t h a t the Court a c c e p t s the p o l i t i c a l r a t i o n a l e f o r the amendments a t f a c e v a l u e . In the event t h a t the Court looks behind the r h e t o r i c and observes t h a t the l e g i s l a t i o n can be used t o f i g h t o t h e r than drug t r a f f i c k i n g and organized crime, w i l l i t be q u i t e so w i l l i n g t o accept i t s i n t r u s i v e nature? F o l l o w i n g C h i e f J u s t i c e Dickson's r e a s o n i n g i n Oakes, the Court must examine the o b j e c t i v e s of the l e g i s l a t i o n i n t o t o , not merely as they r e l a t e t o drug t r a f f i c k i n g . In a l l l i k e l i h o o d , the s. 1 ends t e s t w i l l r e q u i r e a much s t r o n g e r e v i d e n t i a r y b a s i s and l e n g t h i e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n by the Court than was the case w i t h s. 8 of the N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t . 9 7 See g e n e r a l l y , Atrens, supra, nt. 41 a t 1-39. 114 The means t e s t s examine s p e c i f i c l e g i s l a t i v e p r o v i s i o n s which are found t o v i o l a t e one or more l e g a l r i g h t s . In the case of the amendments, the r e s u l t s of these t e s t s w i l l d i f f e r depending on the enumerated r i g h t s or freedoms i n q u e s t i o n . For example, i f i n c l u s i o n of the c i v i l burden of proof i n s. 462.37(1) i s found t o v i o l a t e the presumption of innocence (s. 11( d ) ) , the c o u r t must f i r s t ask whether a r a t i o n a l c o n n e c t i o n e x i s t s between the i n c l u s i o n of the balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t and the o b j e c t i v e of d i v o r c i n g an o f f e n d e r from the proceeds of crime. Assuming such a c o n n e c t i o n , the c o u r t must next ask whether i n c l u s i o n of the reduced burden impairs the presumption of innocence t o the l e a s t p o s s i b l e degree. T h i s w i l l l i k e l y be a c r i t i c a l j u n c t i o n . The h i s t o r i c importance of the c r i m i n a l burden of p r o o f t o the presumption of innocence m i l i t a t e s a g a i n s t any r e d u c t i o n of the onus r e s t i n g w i t h the Crown. For the sake of argument however, assuming t h a t the second prong of the t e s t i s met, the t h i r d p r e s e n t s i t s e l f : i s the o b j e c t i v e of the l e g i s l a t i o n s u f f i c i e n t l y important t o j u s t i f y the c o n f i s c a t i o n of a person's a s s e t s , r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r d e r i v a t i o n ? In a l l l i k e l i h o o d , yes. SUMMARY The proceeds of crime amendments p r e s e n t a seemingly endless a r r a y of C h a r t e r i s s u e s . Assuming t h a t the Crown pursues charges and c o n f i s c a t i o n proceedings under the l e g i s l a t i o n , the c h a l l e n g e s 115 w i l l be many and p r o t r a c t e d . By i n t r o d u c i n g a new concept of punishment t o the C r i m i n a l Code which arguably r e p r e s e n t s a p a r a d i g m a t i c s h i f t i n Canada's approach t o c r i m i n a l law, Canada w i l l i n e v i t a b l y move c l o s e r t o the U n i t e d S t a t e s i n terms of both c r i m i n a l c o n f i s c a t i o n and the p r e v e n t i o n of money l a u n d e r i n g . America's h i s t o r y of c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n dates back over a c e n t u r y w h i l e i t s modern m a n i f e s t a t i o n , p r i m a r i l y s t a t e and f e d e r a l a n t i - r a c k e t e e r i n g laws, i s approximately 20 y e a r s o l d . T h i s modern l e g i s l a t i o n took almost a decade t o mature, weather c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c h a l l e n g e s and become i n g r a i n e d i n the c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system. I t i s probably u n l i k e l y t o expect a f a s t e r r e s u l t i n Canada. N e v e r t h e l e s s , the process of m a t u r a t i o n i t s e l f w i l l p r e s e n t a m u l t i t u d e of i n t e r e s t i n g and thought p r o v o k i n g l e g a l arguments which undoubtedly w i l l c o n t r i b u t e t o a b e t t e r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the amendments and the C h a r t e r i t s e l f . 116 CHAPTER 4 CRIMINAL CONFISCATION IN CANADA - ITS FUTURE The l a s t decade of the t w e n t i e t h century w i l l l i k e l y p l a c e i n c r e a s e d p r e s s u r e on a l l aspects of Canada's c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system, i n c l u d i n g law enforcement. I n e v i t a b l y p o l i c e departments w i l l f a c e e v e r - i n c r e a s i n g f i n a n c i a l c o n s t r a i n t s , imposed on them by f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l governments i n t e n t on r e d u c i n g s p i r a l l i n g d e f i c i t s . The very e x i s t e n c e of some f o r c e s w i l l be t h r e a t e n e d by e f f o r t s t o c o n s o l i d a t e or c o n t r a c t out f o r s e r v i c e s . O p e r a t i o n a l l y , o f f i c e r s w i l l continue, g r u d g i n g l y , t o a d j u s t t o both the C h a r t e r and a heightened l e v e l of p u b l i c o v e r s i g h t . S o c i e t y ' s i n c r e a s e d emphasis on i n d i v i d u a l l i b e r t i e s v i r t u a l l y guarantees a p e r i o d of continued a d a p t a t i o n i n which o f f i c e r s w i l l be f o r c e d t o r e a s s e s s t h e i r methods of o p e r a t i o n , p e r s u a d i n g many t o adopt an e x c e s s i v e l y c a u t i o u s approach t o the i n v e s t i g a t i o n of crime. Human nature being what i t i s , the f e a r of c r i t i c i s m i n the absence of reward does not bode w e l l f o r the f i g h t a g a i n s t crime. Today, Canada i s a haven f o r c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s of v a r i e d and sundry k i n d s . Some have become h i g h l y s p e c i a l i z e d and ' p r o f e s s i o n a l ' i n t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s . N e v e r t h e l e s s , the i n n a t e complacency which appears t o grace the c o l l e c t i v e Canadian c o n s c i e n c e p l a c e s l i t t l e emphasis on o r g a n i z e d crime. Keeping murderers and sexual o f f e n d e r s o f f the s t r e e t s , robbers and b u r g l a r s out of businesses and homes and the t r a f f i c f l o w i n g i n t o 117 and out of c i t i e s seem of much g r e a t e r concern. The i n c r e a s e d s o p h i s t i c a t i o n of c r i m i n a l s and c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s i s r e f l e c t e d by the many who have taken the concept of a g l o b a l v i l l a g e t o heart, l e a r n i n g and m a n i p u l a t i n g t o t h e i r advantage the languages of modern banking, t r a d e , computers and the law. Many q u e s t i o n s present themselves. What chance i s t h e r e f o r s o c i e t y t o ensure t h a t c r i m i n a l behaviour remains the c h o i c e of o n l y a f r i n g e group? What w i l l the impact be on Canada should America's war on drugs prove t o be even a moderate success? W i l l Canada become the c o n d u i t of c h o i c e f o r n a r c o t i c s , r e p l a c i n g south F l o r i d a and Mexico? 1 Who w i l l Canada r e c e i v e , a l o n g w i t h many innocen t persons, d u r i n g the expected mass exodus from Hong Kong i n 1997 and Macao i n 1999? W i l l T r i a d members be among those who seek s h e l t e r ? 2 Can Canadian law enforcement counter the p o t e n t i a l danger posed by i n t e r n a t i o n a l banks s e t t i n g up branch o f f i c e s i n o r d e r t o a c t as s a f e havens f o r overseas money? Few law enforcement o f f i c i a l s w i l l venture an answer t o any of the 1 In 1989, Canadian Press d i s c l o s e d p o r t i o n s of a c o n f i d e n t i a l R.C.M.P. - U.S. Drug Enforcement A d m i n i s t r a t i o n r e p o r t , dated June 1988, which estimated t h a t hundreds of m i l l i o n s of d o l l a r s of i l l e g a l drug proceeds r e g u l a r l y pass untouched a c r o s s the Canada-United S t a t e s border ("Drug money 'crosses border,'" The P r o v i n c e. 30 Oct. 1989 a t 13). 2 A c o m p e l l i n g account of the c r i m i n a l web which A s i a n T r i a d s have spun around the world i s found i n G e r a l d L. Posner, Warlords of Crime - Chinese S e c r e t S o c i e t i e s : The  New M a f i a (New York: Penguin, 1990). The p r o g n o s i s f o r Canada i s not good. Before 1997, Posner f o r e c a s t s an exodus of c r i m i n a l s from Hong Kong, the h e a r t of T r i a d o p e r a t i o n s , t o the U n i t e d S t a t e s and Canada. He notes t h a t a " T r i a d a l e r t " was broadcast by law enforcement agencies i n Canada and elsewhere as f a r back as 1986 (at 259). 118 f o r e g o i n g , l e t alone answers which g i v e comfort. I t i s a t t h i s p o i n t i n Canada's journey through h i s t o r y t h a t the proceeds of crime amendments f i n d t h e i r p l a c e i n the C r i m i n a l  Code. The product of a decade of d i s c u s s i o n , the amendments are n e i t h e r p e r f e c t nor comprehensive. However, by s e e k i n g t o i n t e r r u p t the t r a i l of laundered money and c o n f i s c a t i n g the proceeds of crime, they are not only c r u c i a l t o combatting crime d u r i n g the 1990's but w i l l i n e v i t a b l y pave the way f o r the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of c r i m i n a l law i n t o a v e h i c l e q u i t e u n l i k e t h a t t o which Canadians have become accustomed. Having examined the amendments i n the p r e c e d i n g c h a p t e r s , both from a t e x t u a l and a Charter p e r s p e c t i v e , t h i s Chapter e x p l o r e s the broader environment i n which they must operate as w e l l as t h e i r i n a b i l i t y t o achieve d e s i r e d o b j e c t i v e s , due t o e r r o r s of both o m i s s i o n and i n c l u s i o n . In the category of omission, the Chapter overviews the absence of the f o l l o w i n g : a t r a c i n g mechanism, mandatory f i n a n c i a l r e p o r t i n g requirements, a t a s k f o r c e approach t o i n v e s t i g a t i o n and p r o s e c u t i o n and revenue s h a r i n g arrangements. In the c a t e g o r y of i n c l u s i o n , i t reviews those a s p e c t s of the l e g i s l a t i o n , d i s c u s s e d e a r l i e r , which f a c e p o t e n t i a l h a r d s h i p i n the c o u r t s and the u n d e s i r a b l e r e s o r t t o p l e a b a r g a i n i n g and other e x t r a - j u d i c i a l arrangements. 119 TRACING THE PROCEEDS OF CRIME A s s e t t r a c i n g and money l a u n d e r i n g i n v e s t i g a t i o n s are encumbered today by the speed with which f i n a n c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n s t a ke p l a c e . Computerized banking and i n t e r n a t i o n a l data t r a n s m i s s i o n f a c i l i t i e s have r e v o l u t i o n i z e d the f i n a n c i a l world. The instantaneous t r a n s m i s s i o n of monies from accounts i n Canada t o accounts i n Caribbean or European c o u n t r i e s , f o r t r a n s f e r t o other accounts and c o u n t r i e s , makes the task of t r a c i n g i n c r e d i b l y d i f f i c u l t . V a r i o u s systems are p r e s e n t l y a v a i l a b l e f o r the i n t e r n a t i o n a l t r a n s m i s s i o n of l a r g e amounts of money, the b e s t known b e i n g The S o c i e t y of Worldwide Interbank F i n a n c i a l Telecommunication (SWIFT). 3 Headquartered i n Belgium, SWIFT p r o v i d e s the f a c i l i t y f o r message flow between member i n s t i t u t i o n s around the world. I t e l i m i n a t e s the need f o r p a p e r - i n t e n s i v e telephone and t e l e x t r a n s f e r s and, as a byproduct, makes the document t r a i l much more d i f f i c u l t t o f o l l o w . In a d d i t i o n t o SWIFT, which counts over 100 member o r g a n i z a t i o n s , numerous worldwide p r i v a t e banking networks e x i s t , i n c l u d i n g American, B r i t i s h , Swiss, Japanese and German. The r e s u l t s are s t a g g e r i n g . During 1988, $1 t r i l l i o n was t r a n s f e r r e d 3 I n t e r n a t i o n a l money t r a n s f e r s are c o n s i d e r e d i n the f o l l o w i n g works: D i m i t r i s N. Chorafas, E l e c t r o n i c Funds  T r a n s f e r (London: Butterworths, 1988) a t 110-15 and C a r l F e l s e n f e l d , L e g a l Aspects of E l e c t r o n i c Funds T r a n s f e r s (Stoneham, Mass.: Butterworths, 1988) a t ch. 3. 120 e l e c t r o n i c a l l y i n Canada 4 by l e g i t i m a t e f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . To t h i s must be added the unknown number of t r a n s a c t i o n s conducted by underground banking systems, p r i n c i p a l l y of A s i a n o r i g i n , which a l s o operate on a g l o b a l b a s i s . 5 Not o n l y must p o l i c e agencies become adept a t the methodology of such systems but be w i l l i n g t o undertake the ponderous t a s k of s o r t i n g through the data generated i n the hope of f i n d i n g evidence t o support a charge. The chore i s not easy i n the b e s t of s i t u a t i o n s . In the absence of a t r a c i n g regime w i t h i n the amendments, i t becomes even harder. A s s e t t r a c i n g has long been i n t e g r a l t o the c i v i l law of r e s t i t u t i o n . L e g a l r u l e s e x i s t i n both the common law and i n e q u i t y t o t r a c e and i d e n t i f y a s s e t s , such as c u r r e n c y . However, the common law r e f u s e s t o t r a c e a s s e t s which become commingled. I f not i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l form, they must be c l e a r l y s u b s t i t u t e d by o t h e r items. E q u i t y i s of g r e a t e r a s s i s t a n c e . P e t e r B i r k s notes t h a t r u l e s of e q u i t y a s s i s t once common law r u l e s are d e f e a t e d , c o n t i n u i n g t o t r a c e money a f t e r i t becomes commingled. For example, the p a r i passu r u l e p r o v i d e s t h a t a fund d e p r e c i a t e s " i n the same p r o p o r t i o n s as i t was o r i g i n a l l y c o n s t i t u t e d . " The r u l e s are many and complex. U n f o r t u n a t e l y none found t h e i r way i n t o the 4 Holger Jensen, " H i d i n g the Drug Money," Mac l e a n 1 s , 23 Oct. 1989 a t 46. 5 For example, the Chinese underground banking system i s a c o n d u i t of l o n g - s t a n d i n g . I t r e l i e s on a h i g h degree of t r u s t , f a m i l y t i e s , s e c recy and an absence of documentation. A c c o r d i n g t o Posner: "No white man has even seen i n s i d e the system. I t i s impenetrable" (supra, nt. 2 a t 234). 121 proceeds of crime amendments.6 In the U n i t e d S t a t e s , the f e d e r a l Department of J u s t i c e recommends the use of e q u i t a b l e t r a c i n g r u l e s i n c o n f i s c a t i o n cases, thereby p l a c i n g the government i n a s i m i l a r p o s i t i o n t o t h a t of a c l a i m a n t under, f o r example, a c o n s t r u c t i v e t r u s t or an e q u i t a b l e l i e n . 7 By drawing a d i s t i n c t i o n between ' c i v i l 1 and ' c r i m i n a l ' c o n f i s c a t i o n , a f i c t i o n i s a l s o c r e a t e d i n American law which permits the use of d i f f e r e n t procedures. The law r e s p e c t i n g c i v i l c o n f i s c a t i o n i n the U n ited S t a t e s a f f o r d s i t s law enforcement agencies v a r i o u s i n v e s t i g a t i v e and e v i d e n c e - g a t h e r i n g mechanisms which do not e x i s t i n Canada. For example, American law enforcement agencies p u r s u i n g c i v i l c o n f i s c a t i o n cases can o b t a i n much broader p r e - t r i a l d i s c l o s u r e , i n c l u d i n g d i s c o v e r i e s , d e p o s i t i o n s and documents. C i v i l c o n f i s c a t i o n i s determined on a preponderance of evidence and an adverse f i n d i n g i s p o s s i b l e i f a person c l a i m s p r o t e c t i o n under the F i f t h Amendment d u r i n g a c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g . 8 In o r d e r t o p r o v i d e a t r a c i n g mechanism f o r the proposed c o n f i s c a t i o n and money l a u n d e r i n g l e g i s l a t i o n i n Canada, the E n t e r p r i s e Crime Task Force recommended examining the p o s s i b i l i t y 6 P e t e r B i r k s , An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o the Law of R e s t i t u t i o n (Oxford: Clarendon, 1989), ch. 11. 7 S o l i c i t o r General of Canada, The RICO S t a t u t e : An Overview (Ottawa: n.p., June 1982) a t 27. 8 See M i c h a e l Goldsmith, Asset F o r f e i t u r e - C i v i l  F o r f e i t u r e : T r a c i n g the Proceeds of N a r c o t i c s T r a f f i c k i n g (Washington: Dept. of J u s t i c e , Nov. 1988). 122 of imposing mandatory currency r e p o r t i n g requirements. 9 I t was not t o be. P a r l i a m e n t ' s f a i l u r e t o heed i t s recommendation or t o i n t r o d u c e any t r a c i n g r u l e s whatsoever i s a major d e f i c i e n c y of the amendments, r e q u i r i n g e a r l y c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n . 1 0 MANDATORY FINANCIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Most ' d i r t y money' cannot be laundered except w i t h the a i d , w i t t i n g or otherwise, of f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . Tough American l e g i s l a t i o n and enforcement have r e s u l t e d i n c r i m i n a l c o n v i c t i o n s a g a i n s t v a r i o u s banks, i n c l u d i n g the c o n v i c t i o n t h i s year of Luxembourg's Bank of C r e d i t and Commerce I n t e r n a t i o n a l . The bank, p l a c e d on p r o b a t i o n f o r f i v e y ears, was ordered t o f o r f e i t i n excess of $US 15 m i l l i o n and agreed t o cooperate i n the p r o s e c u t i o n of o t h e r s i n v o l v e d i n a money l a u n d e r i n g scheme, a l l e g e d l y connected t o Panama's Manuel Noriega. 1 1 The p r e v i o u s year, the Banco de Occidente of Panama p a i d a $5 m i l l i o n f i n e i n A t l a n t a , G e o r g i a as the r e s u l t of a c r i m i n a l c o n v i c t i o n r e l a t e d t o money 9 E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Report (Ottawa: Dept. of J u s t i c e , June 10, 1983) a t 114. 1 0 A New Democrat Member of Parliament d e s c r i b e d the f a i l u r e t o i n c l u d e r e p o r t i n g requirements i n the proceeds of crime amendments as the e q u i v a l e n t of l o a d i n g a gun w i t h blanks ( V i c t o r Malarek, Merchants of Misery (Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1989) a t 164). 1 1 "Bank g u i l t y on drug money," The P r o v i n c e . 5 Feb. 1990. 123 l a u n d e r i n g 1 2 and the Ponce F e d e r a l Bank of Puerto R i c o r e c e i v e d a $3 m i l l i o n c r i m i n a l f i n e f o r f a i l i n g t o f i l e c u r r e n c y t r a n s a c t i o n r e p o r t s . 1 3 The a u t h o r i t y f o r currency r e p o r t i n g , the nucleus of America's f i n a n c i a l r e p o r t i n g system, i s contained i n T i t l e s 26 and 31 of the U n i t e d S t a t e s Code. T i t l e 31 r e q u i r e s t h a t f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , a term of l i b e r a l d e f i n i t i o n , f i l e a Currency T r a n s a c t i o n Report (CTR) on most currency t r a n s a c t i o n s which exceed $10,000. 1 4 A r r a n g i n g d e p o s i t s i n such a way as t o evade the r e p o r t i n g t h r e s h o l d , such as by d e p o s i t s of $9,900 i n f i v e d i f f e r e n t i n s t i t u t i o n s , c o n s t i t u t e s the o f f e n c e of s t r u c t u r i n g . 1 5 T r a n s p o r t i n g over $10,000 i n t o or out of the U n i t e d S t a t e s r e q u i r e s the f i l i n g of a Report of I n t e r n a t i o n a l T r a n s p o r t a t i o n of Currency or Monetary Instrument (CMIR) 1 6 and, i n order t o t i g h t e n the net even f u r t h e r , T i t l e 26 r e q u i r e s t h a t a form be completed by 1 2 "Lawyers decry presumption of g u i l t , " Globe and M a i l . 23 Aug. 1989. 1 3 "San Juan bank f i n e d $3 m i l l i o n f o r l a u n d e r i n g , " The  G a z e t t e . 15 Feb. 1989. 1 4 31 U.S.C.. s s . 5313. During the e a r l y 1980's, banks were sometimes r e l a t i v e l y l a x i n f i l i n g CTRs. T h i s changed a f t e r the Bank of Boston r e c e i v e d a $500,000 p e n a l t y . 1 5 I b i d . . s. 5324. A v i o l a t i o n of e i t h e r s. 5313 or s. 5324 may g i v e r i s e t o the c o n f i s c a t i o n of any r e a l or p e r s o n a l p r o p e r t y i n v o l v e d i n the t r a n s a c t i o n , whether attempted or complete, or any p r o p e r t y t r a c e a b l e t o such p r o p e r t y (18 U.S.C. 9 8 1 ( a ) ( 1 ) ( A ) ) . 1 6 31 U. S.C. . s. 5316. F a i l u r e t o f i l e or f i l i n g a r e p o r t w i t h m a t e r i a l misstatements or omissions may r e s u l t i n the c o n f i s c a t i o n of the monetary instrument and any i n t e r e s t i n p r o p e r t y t r a c e a b l e t o t h a t instrument (s. 5317(c)). 124 b u s i n e s s persons and t r a d e s people f o r every c u r r e n c y t r a n s a c t i o n i n v o l v i n g $10,000. 1 7 The q u a n t i t y of r e p o r t s generated i s s t a g g e r i n g - seven m i l l i o n CTR's a y e a r . 1 8 The data obtained from CTR's and CMIR's i s e n t e r e d i n t o a computerized data base operated by the Treasury Department. 1 9 From t h e r e , f e d e r a l , s t a t e and m u n i c i p a l agencies can access the s t o r e d i n f o r m a t i o n , p r o v i d i n g v a l u a b l e i n v e s t i g a t i v e a i d s : By o b t a i n i n g i n f o r m a t i o n about an i n d i v i d u a l ' s p o s s e s s i o n of cash, the person p o s s i b l y can be l i n k e d t o l a r g e and u n e x p l a i n e d accumulations of wealth. That i n t u r n can l e a d t o development of both d i r e c t and c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence of income t h a t cannot be e x p l a i n e d by l e g i t i m a t e sources of funds. The i n f e r e n c e o f t e n f o l l o w s , t h a t i f the money was not o b t a i n e d through l e g i t i m a t e means, i t probably o r i g i n a t e d from i l l e g a l a c t i v i t y . 2 0 Not o n l y have the mandatory r e p o r t i n g requirements p r e c i p i t a t e d many s i g n i f i c a n t i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , 2 1 they have a l s o had a s o b e r i n g e f f e c t on America's f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . C r i m i n a l 1 7 26 U.S.C. . s. 60501. 1 8 Mario Possamai, "The stubborn s t a i n of laundered money," T i m e s - C o l o n i s t . 22 Oct. 1989 a t A8. 1 9 The I n t e r n a l Revenue S e r v i c e (IRS) i n p u t s the data i n D e t r o i t . The IRS data base i s t i e d t o the F i n a n c i a l Crimes Enforcement Network (FINCEN) , which employs approximately 200 persons, i n c l u d i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from numerous i n v e s t i g a t i v e agencies. Operating on a 24-hour a day b a s i s , i t l i n k s t o g e t h e r numerous law enforcement d a t a bases r e l e v a n t t o f i n a n c i a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . 2 0 W i l l i a m Lenck, Asset F o r f e i t u r e - T r a c k i n g Drug Proceeds:  Bank Secrecy Act Reports (Washington: Bureau of J u s t i c e A s s i s t a n c e , Sept. 1989) a t 13. 2 1 Supra. nt. 10 a t 166. Among the s u c c e s s f u l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s d i r e c t l y a t t r i b u t a b l e t o the r e p o r t i n g requirements was Operation P o l a r Cap i n 1989, i n v o l v i n g over $1 b i l l i o n of money laundered by a Columbian c o c a i n e c a r t e l . 125 c o n v i c t i o n s of such i n s t i t u t i o n s shake p u b l i c c o n f i d e n c e and serve as an i n v i t a t i o n t o c l o s e r r e g u l a t o r y s c r u t i n y . Whitney Adams, a c r i m i n a l lawyer s p e c i a l i z i n g i n the defence of major f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s w r i t e s : Most f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s today are h i g h l y motivated t o ensure compliance and cooperate with law enforcement due t o the f e a r of adverse p o l i c y alone. The ot h e r severe p o t e n t i a l c o l l a t e r a l consequences and broad scope of c o r p o r a t e c r i m i n a l l i a b i l i t y have motivated most f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s today t o adopt reasonably s t r i n g e n t compliance programs which i n c l u d e s t r i c t p o l i c i e s , i n t e r n a l c o n t r o l s , and procedures f o r making c r i m i n a l r e f e r r a l s . 2 2 A u s t r a l i a r e c e n t l y enacted f i n a n c i a l r e p o r t i n g l e g i s l a t i o n which s t r o n g l y resembles the American. The Cash T r a n s a c t i o n s  Reports A c t 1988 r e q u i r e s mandatory r e p o r t i n g by a broad panoply of o r g a n i z a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g banks, of currency t r a n s a c t i o n s i n v o l v i n g $10,000 or more. I t a l s o imposes s t r i c t r e c o r d keeping standards f o r f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , a f a i l u r e t o comply g i v i n g r i s e t o the b l o c k i n g of an account and p o s s i b l e c o n f i s c a t i o n . The l e g i s l a t i o n a l s o r e q u i r e s t h a t the i n s t i t u t i o n s a d v i s e the a u t h o r i t i e s o f any i n f o r m a t i o n which they may o b t a i n c o n c e r n i n g s u s p i c i o u s t r a n s a c t i o n s , i n e f f e c t d e p u t i z i n g the i n s t i t u t i o n s . 2 3 However, t o a v o i d unduly i n t e r f e r i n g with the flow of l e g i t i m a t e money, the Act excludes numerous r o u t i n e f i n a n c i a l t r a n s a c t i o n s from i t s r e p o r t i n g requirement. 2 2 Whitney Adams, " P r a c t i c a l Problems i n Money Laundering P r o s e c u t i o n s I n v o l v i n g F i n a n c i a l I n s t i t u t i o n s : A Defense A t t o r n e y ' s P e r s p e c t i v e , " N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e on Economic  Crime Money Laundering Enforcement Conference. 17 May 1990 a t 9. 2 3 See A l a n L. Tyree, Banking Law i n A u s t r a l i a (Sydney: Butterworths, 1990) a t 9-13. 126 Canadian banks and other f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , a number of which m a i n t a i n branch o f f i c e s i n tax haven c o u n t r i e s , have o f t e n been u n w i t t i n g c o n d u i t s f o r laundered money. During the mid-1980 's, one Vancouver bank r e p o r t e d l y accepted s e v e r a l cardboard boxes, b u l g i n g w i t h $US 800,000. 2 4 S i m i l a r l y , Toronto c u r r e n c y exchanges served as the medium of c h o i c e f o r the m a j o r i t y o f $100 m i l l i o n i n drug p r o f i t s laundered by one gang. 2 5 During the l a t e 1970's and e a r l y 1980's, the Bank of Nova S c o t i a ' s Bahamian branch s e r v i c e d $11 m i l l i o n used by the M e d e l l i n c o c a i n e c a r t e l of Columbia t o c r e a t e an i s l a n d base of o p e r a t i o n s . 2 6 These are but the t i p o f the i c e b e r g . I t i s estimated t h a t between $10 and $13 m i l l i o n i n proceeds from Canada's own i l l e g a l drug consumption pass through Canadian f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s each y e a r . 2 7 In the words of a former s e n i o r R.C.M.P. o f f i c i a l , "Simple a r i t h m e t i c t e l l s you i t ' s g e t t i n g i n t o t he banking system." 2 8 During September 1989, a year o l d , j o i n t R.C.M.P. - U n i t e d S t a t e s Drug Enforcement A d m i n i s t r a t i o n r e p o r t leaked t o the p u b l i c . I t noted t h a t hundreds of m i l l i o n s of d o l l a r s i n drug proceeds flowed y e a r l y i n t o Canadian banks t o av o i d American f i n a n c i a l r e p o r t i n g 2 4 Mario Possamai, "How much drug money i s laundered i n Canada?" T i m e s - C o l o n i s t , 22 Oct. 1989. 2 5 I b i d . 2 6 I b i d . 2 7 I b i d . 2 8 A/Comm'r. Rod Stamler ( r e t ' d . ) , quoted by Jensen, supra, n t . 4 a t 43. 127 requirements and p r e d i c t e d an i n c r e a s e i n money l a u n d e r i n g w i t h the advent of f r e e t r a d e between both c o u n t r i e s . 2 9 V i c t o r Malarek observes t h a t Canada has a c q u i r e d a r e p u t a t i o n w i t h i n " c r i m i n a l c i r c l e s throughout North America as an important f i r s t l i n k i n i n t e r n a t i o n a l money l a u n d e r i n g . " 3 0 To date, Canadian banks, t r u s t companies and o t h e r f i n a n c i a l i n t e r m e d i a r i e s have s u c c e s s f u l l y r e s i s t e d a l l attempts t o impose r e p o r t i n g requirements on monies which pass through t h e i r c o r p o r a t e hands. G e n e r a l l y they p o i n t t o the p o s i t i v e e f f e c t of the proceeds of crime amendments and t h e i r own i n t e n s i f i e d s e c u r i t y procedures as a r a t i o n a l e f o r m a i n t a i n i n g the s t a t u s quo. For example, Ken Johnston, head of c o r p o r a t e s e c u r i t y f o r the Royal Bank and chairman of the Canadian Bankers* A s s o c i a t i o n committee on money l a u n d e r i n g r e c e n t l y suggested t h a t the "holes have been plugged." 3 1 The amendments have o b v i o u s l y had a s o b e r i n g e f f e c t on persons i n t e n t on l a u n d e r i n g money i n t h i s country. Whether t h e i r impact w i l l be a n y t h i n g more than t r a n s i t o r y remains t o be seen. During May 1990, the p r e s i d e n t of the Toronto Dominion Bank, Robin K o r t h a l s , among others, attempted t o convince an American C o n g r e s s i o n a l committee t h a t Canadian banks were a l r e a d y tough and 2 John V a l o r z i and S c o t t White, "Money-laundering law h e l p s i n g r a b b i n g drug p r o f i t s , " T i m e s - C o l o n i s t . 29 Sept. 1989 a t A l l . 3 0 Supra. . n t . 10 a t 163. 3 1 I b i d . 128 becoming even tougher on money l a u n d e r e r s . 3 2 S e t t i n g h i s own employees up as a scapegoat, he expressed the concern, however, t h a t the l u r e of l a r g e sums of money c o u l d c o r r u p t bank employees, t h e r e b y n u l l i f y i n g the v o l u n t a r y e f f o r t s of the banks. Warren Moysey, p r e s i d e n t of the Canadian I m p e r i a l Bank of Commerce and chairman of the powerful Canadian Bankers' A s s o c i a t i o n , 3 3 opined t h a t Canada was "doing a l l i t can t o stop the flow of drug money." In support of h i s o p i n i o n , he p o i n t e d t o both the amendments and t r a i n i n g programs f o r t e l l e r s and other s t a f f . 3 4 Senator John K e r r y of Massachusetts was of a d i f f e r e n t mind. He remarked: "Canada i s a f r i e n d l y country whose bankers are thumbing t h e i r noses a t our banking laws." 3 5 American concerns with Canada's banking i n d u s t r y a re not without f o u n d a t i o n i n re c e n t h i s t o r y . During March 1990, Canadian P r e s s r e p o r t e d t h a t Baby Doc D u v a l i e r , former d i c t a t o r of H a i t i , 3 2 "Banker: Drug cash can f o i l b i d s t o expose d i r t y money," T i m e s - C o l o n i s t . 17 May 1990 a t B l l . 3 3 The banking lobby i s c r e d i t e d w i t h p r e v e n t i n g the passage of bank r e p o r t i n g or r e g u l a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n . V i c t o r Malarek w r i t e s : Canadian banking e x e c u t i v e s have fought p i t c h e d b a t t l e s i n the boardrooms of Ottawa t o keep the f e d e r a l government from imposing measures t h a t would r e q u i r e banks or other f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s t o d i s c l o s e i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t c o u l d h e l p p o l i c e d e t e c t money l a u n d e r i n g by i n t e r n a t i o n a l n a r c o t i c s t r a f f i c k e r s . Malarek views the absence of r e p o r t i n g requirements i n B i l l C-61 as a win f o r the banking lobby (supra, n t . 10 a t 164). 3 4 I b i d . 3 5 As quoted by Jensen, supra. nt. 4 a t 43. 129 laundered $41.8 m i l l i o n of i l l i c i t monies through unknowing Canadian banks between 1986 and 1987. 3 6 An hour a f t e r the Canadian P r e s s r e p o r t was a i r e d , Canada's M i n i s t e r of S t a t e f o r Finance, G i l l e s L o i s e l l e , a dvised t h a t the government would i n t r o d u c e l e g i s l a t i o n aimed a t r e q u i r i n g f i n a n c i a l i n s t i t u t i o n s and other b u s i n e s s e s t o maintain r e c o r d s of i n t e r e s t t o f i n a n c i a l i n v e s t i g a t o r s . L o i s e l l e and h i s A d v i s o r y Committee on Money Laundering, composed overwhelmingly of r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from the f i n a n c i a l world, r e j e c t e d the t r a n s a c t i o n r e p o r t i n g systems of the U n i t e d S t a t e s and A u s t r a l i a i n favour of one t h a t advocates b e t t e r r e c o r d k e e p i n g . 3 7 The Canadian approach i s - t y p i c a l l y Canadian. I t i s not p r o a c t i v e , as i n the United S t a t e s and A u s t r a l i a , where the r e g u l a t i o n s are designed t o a s s i s t law enforcement agencies i n t h e i r s e a r c h f o r money la u n d e r i n g o p e r a t i o n s . The proposed Canadian approach i s r e a c t i v e , i t w i l l improve the ' a u d i t t r a i l , ' o r a b i l i t y of i n v e s t i g a t o r s t o f o l l o w a money l a u n d e r i n g scam post  f a c t o . 3 8 In Canada, i n v e s t i g a t o r s w i l l be f o r c e d t o r e l y on t r a d i t i o n a l i n v e s t i g a t i v e methods and sources t o i s o l a t e s u s p i c i o u s 3 6 "Money l a u n d e r i n g law must not be d e l a y e d , " Times- C o l o n i s t . 25 Mar. 1990 a t A4. 3 7 I b i d . 3 8 T h i s approach app a r e n t l y has the support of the Commissioner of the R.C.M.P., Norman I n k s t e r : "I t h i n k the major banks are w i l l i n g t o co-operate and i f t h a t o c c u r s , the requirement f o r r e p o r t i n g i s not e s s e n t i a l " (as quoted i n S t u a r t McCarthy, "Crime P r o f i t s Keep P i l i n g Up," The Ottawa  Sunday Sun. 12 Feb. 1989). 130 t r a n s a c t i o n s . 3 9 THE STRIKE FORCE P r o s e c u t o r s and the p o l i c e i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s f a c e d s i m i l a r problems two decades ago. The l a c k of l e g i s l a t i v e t o o l s combined w i t h a v a s t , sometimes incomprehensible a r r a y of law enforcement and i n v e s t i g a t i v e agencies at the f e d e r a l , s t a t e and m u n i c i p a l l e v e l s , f o r c e d them t o cooperate. They r e s o r t e d t o j o i n t o p e r a t i o n s aimed a t combining the r e s o u r c e s of v a r i o u s i n v e s t i g a t i v e and p r o s e c u t o r i a l agencies i n p u r s u i t of a common t a r g e t . Though not always s u c c e s s f u l , 4 0 j o i n t o p e r a t i o n s , o f t e n dubbed s t r i k e f o r c e s or task f o r c e s , have been r e f i n e d over the y e a r s and now o f t entimes resemble independent law enforcement a u t h o r i t i e s . America's f i r s t f e d e r a l s t r i k e f o r c e commenced work i n B u f f a l o i n 1966, f o l l o w e d by 17 others i n the next f i v e y e a r s . 4 1 Permanent f e d e r a l and s t a t e t a s k f o r c e s now e x i s t i n many p a r t s of the n a t i o n , d e d i c a t e d t o c o u n t e r i n g p a r t i c u l a r c r i m i n a l a c t i v i t y or o r g a n i z a t i o n s . A study of the s t r i k e f o r c e s completed by Canada's 3 9 For example, p u b l i c r e c o r d s , garbage searches, tax i n f o r m a t i o n , wiretaps, s u r v e i l l a n c e and informants. 4 0 The American experience was dampened i n 1977 by a General A c c o u n t i n g O f f i c e study which d e s c r i b e d the s t r i k e f o r c e s as f a i l u r e s , emphasizing a l a c k of c l e a r o b j e c t i v e s , c o n t r o l and e v a l u a t i o n (supra, nt. 7 a t 50-55 and Addendum). 4 1 I b i d , a t 50. 131 M i n i s t r y of the S o l i c i t o r General d i v i d e d t h e i r work i n t o f o u r s t a g e s : i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of t a r g e t s , i n t e l l i g e n c e s h a r i n g on i d e n t i f i e d t a r g e t s , c l o s e c o o p e r a t i o n between s u p e r v i s o r y l e v e l agents from v a r i o u s o r g a n i z a t i o n s and the i n t r o d u c t i o n of s p e c i a l i z e d a t t o r n e y s t o prepare f o r grand j u r y h e a r i n g s . 4 2 The v e r y nature of complex, f i n a n c i a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s c a l l s f o r a t a s k f o r c e approach. Not only i s i t a complex area of law, but i t o v e r l a p s w i t h the law governing f r a u d s , c o n s p i r a c i e s and w i r e t a p s . In a d d i t i o n , the i n v e s t i g a t i o n s themselves are prone t o becoming mired i n a sea of paper. The l e n g t h of time r e q u i r e d t o b r i n g a matter t o c o u r t o f t e n a f f o r d s witnesses and o f f e n d e r s an o p p o r t u n i t y t o leave the j u r i s d i c t i o n and can d e s t r o y the i n i t i a t i v e and i n t e r e s t of i n v e s t i g a t o r s and p r o s e c u t o r s . A l s o , the t a r g e t s of complex f i n a n c i a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s are o f t e n very powerful i n terms of f i n a n c i a l and p o l i t i c a l s t r e n g t h and s u f f i c i e n t l y i n s u l a t e d t o r e s i s t a l l but the most a g g r e s s i v e i n v e s t i g a t i v e approaches. 4 3 The concept of a task f o r c e approach t o c r i m i n a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n i s worthy of s e r i o u s c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n Canada. With both a f e d e r a l system of government and a f r a c t u r e d c r i m i n a l j u s t i c e system, not u n l i k e the U n i t e d S t a t e s , 4 4 c o o p e r a t i o n i n order t o a c h i e v e a 4 2 I b i d , a t 51. 4 3 I b i d , a t 45. 4 4 Both c o u n t r i e s have t h r e e p r i n c i p a l l e v e l s of government, each l e v e l p o s s e s s i n g p o l i c e f o r c e s or i n v e s t i g a t i v e a g e n c i e s . The p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y g r e a t e r number of p o l i c e departments i n the United S t a t e s i s a t t r i b u t a b l e t o Canada's lo n g h i s t o r y of c o n t r a c t i n g by p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l common g o a l i s d e s i r a b l e . For the proceeds of crime amendments, i t may be a n e c e s s i t y . P o l i c e o f f i c e r s are p r i m a r i l y i n v e s t i g a t o r s . They r e q u i r e c l o s e support, i n the form of l e g a l a d v i c e from Crown c o u n s e l , as w e l l as t e c h n i c a l e x p e r t i s e from accountants, bankers and b u s i n e s s persons when d e a l i n g w i t h complex commercial i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . I f the i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n v o l v e drugs or the proceeds of drug t r a f f i c k i n g , then f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l governments each have a stake i n the outcome. By combining the i n v e s t i g a t i v e t a l e n t of p o l i c e o f f i c e r s and s p e c i a l i s t s from each l e v e l , a ta s k f o r c e becomes an a t t r a c t i v e v e h i c l e . O b v i o u s l y i n t e r - f o r c e r i v a l r i e s w i l l o c c u r . 4 5 As w e l l , d i f f e r e n t o p e r a t i n g methods and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e procedures w i l l pose s t a r t - u p problems. Nevertheless, the v a l u e of a c o o r d i n a t e d approach s u r e l y outweighs such i r r i t a n t s . A s i d e b e n e f i t of a u n i f i e d approach i s the e d u c a t i o n a l v a l u e t o i n v e s t i g a t o r s and pr o s e c u t o r s who may be new t o f i n a n c i a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s . As noted i n Chapter Three, the f e a r of the unknown has caused many i n v e s t i g a t o r s and lawyers t o shy away from proceeds governments f o r R.C.M.P. s e r v i c e s . In the U n i t e d S t a t e s , c o n s t i t u t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r c r i m i n a l law r e s t s with the s t a t e s whereas i n Canada, c r i m i n a l law i s enacted by Parliament, however a d m i n i s t e r e d by t he p r o v i n c e s and m u n i c i p a l i t i e s . Drug laws and c e r t a i n o t h e r f e d e r a l s t a t u t e s present an anomaly i n Canada. Though c r i m i n a l i n nature and e f f e c t , v i o l a t i o n s are i n v e s t i g a t e d by p o l i c e f o r c e s a t a l l l e v e l s , y e t prosecuted f e d e r a l l y . 4 5 These cannot be underestimated. Malarek r e f e r s t o " f i e r c e " i n t e r - a g e n c y r i v a l r i e s , n o t i n g t h a t "RCMP i n v e s t i g a t o r s are widely reputed t o be extremely t e r r i t o r i a l , o f t e n r e f u s i n g t o cooperate i n i n v e s t i g a t i o n s mounted by m u n i c i p a l p o l i c e f o r c e s " (supra. n t . 10 a t 6). 133 of crime cases. The same phenomenon o c c u r r e d w i t h the RICO s t a t u t e s i n the United S t a t e s . There the absence of i n s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g programs and inadequate p o l i c y g u i d e l i n e s dampened i n t e r e s t . In an attempt t o counter the problem, a t l e a s t one s t r i k e f o r c e l e a d e r , a s e n i o r f e d e r a l a t t o r n e y , t r a v e l l e d the U n i t e d S t a t e s f o r almost two years, e d u c a t i n g p r o s e c u t o r s . 4 6 I n t e g r a l t o an a s s e t f o r f e i t u r e s t r i k e f o r c e or team approach i s a support u n i t which can manage s e i z e d a s s e t s . Although i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t many a s s e t s w i l l remain with t h e i r c u s t o d i a n s , such as banks, or even under the care and management of an accused, such as a r e s i d e n c e , many others w i l l r e q u i r e r e g u l a r and c o s t l y management s e r v i c e s . V a r i o u s o p t i o n s are a v a i l a b l e , i n c l u d i n g r e s o r t t o r e c e i v e r s and a s s e t management p r o f e s s i o n a l s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y the amendments p l a c e the c h o i c e o f o p t i o n s s q u a r e l y i n the l a p of the p r e s i d i n g judge, who w i l l o f t e n t i m e s pass i t on t o the agency of l a s t r e s o r t , the p o l i c e . The l e g i s l a t i o n p r o v i d e s v i r t u a l l y no guidance. The ad hoc arrangements which e x i s t today must be r e p l a c e d by a s s e t management based upon sound f i s c a l p r i n c i p l e s and i n the c a r e of p r o f e s s i o n a l s , thereby f r e e i n g the j u d i c i a r y and law enforcement from an onerous and unwanted task. In the U n i t e d S t a t e s , the Marshals S e r v i c e manages the g r e a t b u l k of a s s e t s s e i z e d by f e d e r a l agents and arranges f o r t h e i r s a l e 46 Supra, n t . 7 a t 44. 134 through brokers and a u c t i o n e e r s . 7 Among the 200 employees engaged i n such a c t i v i t y , the S e r v i c e employs persons w i t h a wide background of e x p e r t i s e , i n c l u d i n g ranchers, p i l o t s and r e a l t o r s . 4 8 In an attempt t o a v o i d l i a b i l i t y f o r improper s e i z u r e s and unnecessary management r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , the marshals conduct a background search on t a r g e t e d a s s e t s , i d e n t i f y i n g those which are h e a v i l y encumbered. 4 9 M u n i c i p a l i t i e s employ s i m i l a r management teams. In D e t r o i t , approximately 30 persons review r e p o r t s , t a r g e t a s s e t s and manage them a f t e r s e i z u r e . 5 0 ASSET SHARING The a v i d p u r s u i t of a s s e t s and money l a u n d e r i n g o p e r a t i o n s which c h a r a c t e r i z e d the American war on drugs d u r i n g the 1980*s depended h e a v i l y on the s t r i k e f o r c e v e h i c l e . However, i n a d d i t i o n , i n t e r - a g e n c y c o o p e r a t i o n extended t o o t h e r a r e a s . Since the e s t a b l i s h m e n t of a f e d e r a l a s s e t s e i z u r e fund i n 1984, law enforcement agencies have been e n t i t l e d t o r e c e i v e , e i t h e r i n s p e c i e or otherwise, v a r i o u s of the a s s e t s c o n f i s c a t e d from suspect o f f e n d e r s . Numerous f e d e r a l laws a u t h o r i z e the t r a n s f e r of 4 7 G. P a t r i c k G a l l a g h e r , Asset F o r f e i t u r e - The Management  and D i s p o s i t i o n of S e i z e d A s s e t s (Washington: Bureau of J u s t i c e A s s i s t a n c e , Nov. 1988) a t 2 and 6. 4 8 I b i d , a t 7. 4 9 I b i d , a t 8. 5 0 I b i d . 135 c o n f i s c a t e d p r o p e r t y t o s t a t e or m u n i c i p a l law enforcement agencies "which p a r t i c i p a t e d d i r e c t l y i n any of the a c t s which l e d t o the s e i z u r e or f o r f e i t u r e of the p r o p e r t y . " 5 1 Such e q u i t a b l e s h a r i n g i s i n t e n d ed t o r e f l e c t the r e l a t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n s of the agencies i n v o l v e d i n a j o i n t o p e r a t i o n . 5 2 Adoptive s h a r i n g arrangements a l s o e x i s t i n which s t a t e or l o c a l agencies s e i z e p r o p e r t y which can be c o n f i s c a t e d under f e d e r a l law. They then ask the f e d e r a l Department of J u s t i c e t o adopt t h e i r s e i z u r e and share i n the e v e n t u a l c o n f i s c a t i o n . The i n c e n t i v e f o r law enforcement agencies t o pursue f i n a n c i a l i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i s obvious. When agencies combine t h e i r e f f o r t s , such as i n a s t r i k e f o r c e , they a l l share the wealth. By 'paying t h e i r way,' the p o l i c e need not concern themselves unduly w i t h the impecunious nature of t h e i r p o l i t i c a l masters. Budgets become secondary. However, the p o t e n t i a l f o r abuse e x i s t s . Tom N a y l o r has argued t h a t a l l o w i n g p o l i c e f o r c e s t o r e t a i n s e i z e d monies reduces the p o l i c e t o the s t a t u s of bounty-hunters. 5 3 Furthermore, a tendency develops among p o l i c e f o r c e s t o t a r g e t o n l y those cases which w i l l y i e l d a s s e t s , t e n d i n g t o forego o t h e r s which might 5 1 See, f o r example, T i t l e 18, s. 981(e) and T i t l e 21, s. 881(e)(3) of the U.S. Code. 5 2 See g e n e r a l l y M i c hael F. Z e l d i n , Harry S. H a r b i n and S t e f a n D. C a s s e l l a , Money Laundering F o r f e i t u r e s , r e v . ed. (Washington: Dept. of J u s t i c e , 11 May 1990). 5 3 Bruce L i v e s e y , "A dangerous drug-war weapon - Power t o s e i z e s u s p e c t s ' a s s e t s may t h r e a t e n c i v i l l i b e r t i e s , " The  Globe and M a i l . 19 Feb. 1990 a t A7. 136 produce government revenue, i n the form of f i n e s . One prominent Toronto defence lawyer, C l a y t o n Ruby, suggests t h a t Canadian p o l i c e f o r c e s may p u r p o s e l y be d e l a y i n g t h e i r enforcement of the proceeds of crime amendments i n the hope of o b t a i n i n g a s i m i l a r s h a r i n g agreement. 5 4 As y e t , Canadian governments have not agreed where s e i z e d a s s e t s w i l l go or who w i l l assume l i a b i l i t y i f the Crown i s r e q u i r e d t o indemnify persons as a r e s u l t of the A t t o r n e y General's mandatory undertakings. Paul St. Denis of the f e d e r a l Department of J u s t i c e suggests t h a t c o n f i s c a t e d a s s e t s w i l l be p l a c e d i n a c e n t r a l fund and l a t e r d i s p e r s e d among v a r i o u s f e d e r a l and p r o v i n c i a l budgets. 5 5 The Canadian C h i e f s of P o l i c e , caucused a t t h e i r G eneral Assembly i n 1989, passed a r e s o l u t i o n c a l l i n g f o r the reimbursement t o p o l i c e f o r c e s "from the f o r f e i t e d proceeds of crime" of "funds expended on p o l i c e r e s o u r c e s and o t h e r c o s t s . " 5 6 In response, the M i n i s t e r of J u s t i c e agreed t o review the m a t t e r . 5 7 The s h a r i n g p h i l o s o p h y i s a k i n t o an i n f u s i o n of p r i v a t e e n t e r p r i s e i n t o law enforcement. I t has m e r i t , a l t h o u g h the excesses of the American experience should serve as a warning t o Canadian l e g i s l a t o r s t h a t s t r i c t a c c o u n t a b i l i t y and o v e r s i g h t are 5 4 I b i d . 5 5 Supra. nt. 38. 5 6 "84th Annual General Meeting" - September 14, 1989 -R e s o l u t i o n s , " (Oct. 1989) 8 Cdn. P o l i c e C h i e f N e w s l e t t e r 8. 5 7 "Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of C h i e f s of P o l i c e Major C i t y Mayors' Caucus Symposium on I l l i c i t Drugs Communique -October 26, 1989," (Nov. 1989) 8 Cdn. P o l i c e C h i e f  N e w s l e t t e r 2 a t 3. 137 i n t e g r a l t o the success of such a program. The g o a l s of law enforcement cannot take second p l a c e t o a 'quick buck.' On the ot h e r hand, what b e t t e r way t o o f f s e t mounting law enforcement expenses, p a r t i c u l a r l y as they r e l a t e t o s o p h i s t i c a t e d f i n a n c i a l c r imes. THE AMENDMENTS - CAN THEY WEATHER THE STORM? O p e r a t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s mean very l i t t l e u n l e s s they are premised on s t r o n g and e f f e c t i v e l e g i s l a t i o n . Chapter Two h i g h l i g h t e d c e r t a i n t e x t u a l and i n t e r p r e t i v e problems w i t h the proceeds of crime l e g i s l a t i o n , whereas Chapter Three c o n s i d e r e d v a r i o u s C h a r t e r c h a l l e n g e s . The amendments are sure t o be the s u b j e c t of c o n s i d e r a b l e argument and numerous a p p e l l a t e d e c i s i o n s . They touch upon many t o p i c a l areas i n c r i m i n a l law, not the l e a s t of which being the Chart e r . I t i s o b v i o u s l y too e a r l y t o p r e d i c t w i t h any degree of c e r t a i n t y what the outcome of thes e c h a l l e n g e s w i l l be, save t o p r e d i c t a t u r b u l e n t puberty. The d e f i n i t i o n s of 'proceeds of crime* and ' l a u n d e r i n g proceeds of crime' are sure t o provoke much disagreement. The se a r c h and r e s t r a i n t p r o v i s i o n s w i l l be the s u b j e c t o f numerous p r e - t r i a l motions which w i l l tend t o d e l a y c o n f i s c a t i o n cases. Most of the motions w i l l d e a l with the r e l e a s e o f s e i z e d or r e s t r a i n e d items under the v a r i o u s r e s t o r a t i v e p r o v i s i o n s . The d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n between i n personam and i n rem 138 c o n f i s c a t i o n poses unique problems, but not as many as the i n t r o d u c t i o n of two d i f f e r e n t burdens of proof i n the case of the former. The balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s t e s t i s one of the weakest l i n k s i n the l e g i s l a t i o n , c l o s e l y f o l l o w e d by the i n f e r e n c e which a p p l i e s t o persons who d i e or abscond. A d d i t i o n a l dilemmas are faced by the nature of mandatory f i n a n c i a l undertakings, the d e f i n i t i o n f o r 'Attorney G e n e r a l , • the mandatory imprisonment i n d e f a u l t p r o v i s i o n s and the net worth i n f e r e n c e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , the amendments have much t o commend them. In my o p i n i o n , the l e g i s l a t i o n w i l l s u r v i v e the c h a l l e n g e s ahead, though not i n t a c t . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , those a s p e c t s which are most v u l n e r a b l e are a l s o those of g r e a t e s t importance, f o r example, the l a u n d e r i n g o f f e n c e and c o n f i s c a t i o n on a balance of p r o b a b i l i t i e s . Only time w i l l t e l l whether the l e g i s l a t i o n w i l l s u r v i v e . The a l t e r n a t i v e i s not a t t r a c t i v e . PLEA BARGAINING AND EXTRA-JUDICIAL ARRANGEMENTS When a l e g i s l a t i v e scheme i s flawed, the Crown i s f o r c e d t o make the bes t of a bad s i t u a t i o n . P l e a b a r g a i n i n g i s an easy, though u n d e s i r a b l e , a l t e r n a t i v e . In the past , p r o s e c u t o r s c o u l d make arrangements w i t h accused persons which contemplated a g r e e i n g t o reduced sentences and the withdrawal of counts on m u l t i p l e count i n f o r m a t i o n s and indictments, i n exchange f o r g u i l t y p l e a s . Sometimes they made l e s s obvious c o n c e s s i o n s ; f o r example, f a i l i n g 139 t o a p p r i s e a c o u r t of a l l the circumstances of an o f f e n c e or c e r t a i n a s p e c t s of an accused person's c r i m i n a l p a s t . With the proceeds of crime amendments, the Crown a c q u i r e s an extremely powerful weapon t o w i e l d over accused persons. No l o n g e r i s i t o n l y a person's continued l i b e r t y which i s a t s t a k e . Now, the t h r e a t of f i n a n c i a l r u i n through the c o n f i s c a t i o n of a s s e t s i s added t o the s t a k e s . How easy i t w i l l be, f o r example, t o o f f e r an accused the c h o i c e between a lengthy p r i s o n term or a l e s s e r term combined w i t h the c o n f i s c a t i o n of a s e i z e d s p o r t s c a r or speedboat. Or, i n exchange f o r a p l e a of g u i l t y , the Crown might evidence i t s w i l l i n g n e s s t o forego a c o n f i s c a t i o n h e a r i n g , thereby a l l o w i n g an o f f e n d e r t o r e t a i n ownership of suspect a s s e t s . The most dramatic example t o date of an e x t r a - j u d i c i a l accommodation i n v o l v i n g the amendments r e s u l t e d from an i n v e s t i g a t i o n spearheaded by American a u t h o r i t i e s i n t o the a c t i v i t i e s of the Banco de Occidente of Panama. Approximately $100 m i l l i o n of i t s a s s e t s were f r o z e n i n v a r i o u s c o u n t r i e s , $13.5 m i l l i o n of which were on d e p o s i t t o i t s account i n the Toronto branch of a Swiss bank. During e a r l y J u l y 1989, the Supreme Court of O n t a r i o ordered the r e l e a s e of the Toronto funds and t h e i r r e p a t r i a t i o n t o the Bank's f r o z e n New York account. In a statement of f a c t s p r e s e n t e d t o the Court, the accused Bank, Canada and the U n i t e d S t a t e s agreed t h a t the proper forum f o r r e s o l u t i o n of the matter, i n c l u d i n g the i s s u e of c o n f i s c a t i o n , was the U n i t e d 140 S t a t e s . 5 8 Canada's r a t i o n a l e f o r agreeing t o the r e l e a s e became c l e a r the f o l l o w i n g month when the Bank pleaded g u i l t y i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s and r e c e i v e d a $5 m i l l i o n f i n e . For Canada's h e l p i n s e i z i n g the a s s e t s , i t r e c e i v e d a p r o p o r t i o n a t e share, $1.2 m i l l i o n . 5 9 N e i t h e r the Bank nor i t s o f f i c e r s f a c e d Canadian c o u r t s . The C r i m i n a l Code merely served as a v e h i c l e by which the d e p o s i t s c o u l d be f r o z e n . Furthermore, Canada r e c e i v e d o n l y a f r a c t i o n of the monies r e s t r a i n e d i n t h i s country, a l l (or none) of which c o u l d presumably have been c o n f i s c a t e d . 6 0 AVOIDING THE 'BIG FISH 1 U n l e s s and u n t i l law enforcement o b t a i n s s t r o n g support from i t s p o l i t i c a l masters t o pursue the 'kingpins' of o r g a n i z e d crime, i t i s r e a s o n a b l e t o assume t h a t p o l i c e and the Crown w i l l be apprehensive of the downside r i s k s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p r o s e c u t i n g the amendments. The i n e v i t a b l e a l t e r n a t i v e i s f o r law enforcement a g e n c i e s t o c o n c e n t r a t e on l e s s e r t a r g e t s , more e a s i l y a t t a i n a b l e 5 8 "Judge o r d e r s RCMP t o g i v e up $16 m i l l i o n s e i z e d i n drug probe," The Sunday S t a r . 2 J u l y 1989. 5 9 Supra, n t . 12. 6 0 T h i s arrangement h i g h l i g h t s the v a l u e t o the U n i t e d S t a t e s of i t s e q u i t a b l e s h a r i n g program. The program i s not r e s t r i c t e d t o domestic law enforcement agencies and, as a r e s u l t , f o r e i g n agencies are o f t e n more w i l l i n g t o cooperate w i t h American a u t h o r i t i e s than t o i n i t i a t e t h e i r own domestic cases, knowing t h a t money w i l l flow t o them as a r e s u l t of America's c o n f i s c a t i o n l e g i s l a t i o n . 141 s t a t i s t i c s and s m a l l e r a s s e t s e i z u r e s . I f the l e g i s l a t i o n c a p t u r e s o n l y minor c r i m i n a l s , p e t t y t h i e v e s , p r o s t i t u t e s and the l i k e , i t s o b j e c t i v e s are l a r g e l y defeated. A p a r a l l e l can be drawn t o the f a i l u r e of Canada's h a b i t u a l c r i m i n a l l e g i s l a t i o n . Although i n f o r c e f o r many y e a r s , those c a p t u r e d i n i t s net were g e n e r a l l y a f r i n g e of the dangerous c r i m i n a l element, l a r g e l y poor, uneducated, s o c i a l m i s f i t s , r e l e g a t e d by themselves and by s o c i e t y t o a l i f e o f p e t t y crime. R i c h a r d Peck, a bencher of the Law S o c i e t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, r e c e n t l y expressed h i s hope t h a t the Crown w i l l a c t " r e s p o n s i b l y and s p a r i n g l y " i n i t s use of the new l e g i s l a t i o n . Concerned w i t h the search of lawyers' o f f i c e s , he added t h a t "the mere a c t of s e a r c h i n g a lawyer's o f f i c e i s g o ing t o cause g r e a t a n g u i s h . " 6 1 Few would d i s a g r e e t h a t the l e g i s l a t i o n must be used r e s p o n s i b l y . During i t s formative stages, t h i s may a l s o r e q u i r e a c t i n g s p a r i n g l y . 6 2 T h e r e a f t e r , i t w i l l be incumbent on law enforcement o f f i c i a l s t o use i t r e s p o n s i b l y and r e g u l a r l y i n order t o o b t a i n d e f i n i t i v e j u d i c i a l r u l i n g s and, h o p e f u l l y , a c h i e v e i t s h i g h o b j e c t i v e s . To do otherwise w i l l be t o r e l e g a t e i t t o o b s c u r i t y . 6 1 L a r r y S t i l l , "Drug p r o f i t s t a r g e t of new law," The  Vancouver Sun. 9 Nov. 1989 a t A13. 6 2 Commissioner I n k s t e r of the R.C.M.P. supports t h i s p h i l o s o p h y . Interviewed s h o r t l y a f t e r p r o c l a m a t i o n of the amendments, he s t a t e d : "We want t o go c a r e f u l l y so t h a t we get good cases and good s e i z u r e s " (as quoted by S t u a r t McCarthy, supra, nt. 38). 142 Regular use does not mean u s i n g i t on p e t t y c r i m i n a l s , the easy t a r g e t s . Resources must be conc e n t r a t e d on those who make a d i f f e r e n c e i n the c r i m i n a l underworld. I f t h i s means u p s e t t i n g the c o l l e c t i v e psyche of c e r t a i n p r o f e s s i o n a l groups, be they lawyers, accountants or businesspersons, then so be i t . SUMMARY Money has been d e s c r i b e d as "the l i f e - s u p p o r t system" of o r g a n i z e d c r i m e . 6 3 I t i s more than t h a t . I t not o n l y f u e l s the p r o c e s s but i s i t s r a i s o n d ' e t r e . In the i l l e g a l drug world, cash i s the medium of exchange. But cash i s cumbersome and, i n l a r g e q u a n t i t i e s , weighs a tremendous amount. 6 4 P r e v e n t i n g c r i m i n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s from ploughing t h e i r p r o f i t s i n t o l e g i t i m a t e investments i s c r u c i a l t o stemming the t i d e of drug t r a f f i c k i n g and ot h e r o r g a n i z e d crime. Canada p r o v i d e s an i d e a l environment f o r the l a u n d e r i n g of money. I t d i s p l a y s s t a b i l i t y i n both i t s p o l i t i c a l and f i n a n c i a l spheres. Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal are major world c i t i e s , b o a s t i n g l a r g e e t h n i c communities and i n t e r n a t i o n a l banking 6 3 James D. Harmon, e x e c u t i v e d i r e c t o r of the P r e s i d e n t ' s Commission on Organized Crime, as quoted i n Sarah B a r t l e t t and o t h e r s , "Money Laundering - Who's Involved, How i t Works, and Where I t ' s Spreading," Business Week, 18 Mar. 1985 a t 75. 6 4 A s u i t c a s e c o n t a i n i n g $1 m i l l i o n i n $20. b i l l s weighs 50 ki l o g r a m s . The l a r g e drug c a r t e l s r e p o r t e d l y weigh r a t h e r than count t h e i r money (supra, n t. 10 a t 162). 143 f a c i l i t i e s . G e o g r a p h i c a l l y , Canada i s a gateway t o the U n i t e d S t a t e s w i t h easy a i r and water access t o A s i a and Europe. I t s c r i m i n a l s a n c t i o n s are m i l d by the measure of many oth e r c o u n t r i e s . There i s almost complete freedom of movement w i t h i n the n a t i o n f o r both persons and a s s e t s . In a d d i t i o n , i t has a r e s i d e n t market f o r drugs and consequently, persons w i l l i n g t o take the chance of t r a n s p o r t i n g drugs or d i r t y money. As noted i n Chapter Three, the i n s i g n i f i c a n t amount of l i t i g a t i o n which has r e s u l t e d from the amendments s i n c e t h e i r p r o c l a m a t i o n almost two years ago i s l i k e l y the r e s u l t of v a r i o u s i n t e r n a l and e x t e r n a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . However, d e s p i t e the problems posed by the amendments, they are a f i r s t s t e p . Although some may not s u r v i v e the t e s t s t o be faced i n the c o u r t s , they are based upon sound p r i n c i p l e : t a k i n g the p r o f i t out of crime. To even approach t h i s noble o b j e c t i v e , however, w i l l r e q u i r e more than the amendments, i n i s o l a t i o n , can d e l i v e r . A l s o r e q u i r e d are a t r a c i n g mechanism with mandatory f i n a n c i a l r e p o r t i n g , a team approach t o i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g a s h a r i n g of proceeds and, most of a l l , p o l i t i c a l w i l l . 144 BIBLIOGRAPHY STATUTES, BILLS AND TREATIES CITED An A c t f o r Compensating the F a m i l i e s of Persons K i l l e d By  A c c i d e n t s . 9 & 10 V i c t . , c. 93. An A c t r e s p e c t i n g Procedure i n C r i m i n a l Cases, and o t h e r matters  r e l a t i n g t o C r i m i n a l Law. S.C. 1869, c. 29. An A c t r e s p e c t i n g the C r i m i n a l Law. S.C. 1892, c. 29. A n t i - D r u g Abuse Act 1986. P.L. 99-570 (27 Oct. 1986), as amended by P.L. 100-690 (18 Nov. 1988). B i l l C-61 Canada A c t . 1892 (U.K.). c. 11. Comprehensive Drug Abuse P r e v e n t i o n and Crime C o n t r o l A c t 197 0 Comprehensive F o r f e i t u r e A c t of 1984. 18 U.S.C, s. 1963(a)(3)(Supp. I l l 1985). C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t . 1867. U.K., 30 & 31 V i c t . , c. 3. C o n s t i t u t i o n A c t . 1982. C o n t i n u i n g C r i m i n a l E n t e r p r i s e s Act, 21 U.S.C., s. 848 (1982 and Supp. I l l 1985). C r i m i n a l Code. R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, as amended. C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e A c t 1988. 1988, c. 33. C r i m i n a l Law Reform A c t . 1984, B i l l C-19. C r i m i n a l Law Amendment Act . 1985. B i l l C-18. Deodands A b o l i t i o n A c t . 9 & 10 V i c t . , c. 62. Drug T r a f f i c k i n g Offences A c t 1986. 1986, c. 32. Food and Drugs A c t . R.S.C. 1985, c. F-27, as amended. F o r f e i t u r e A c t . 33 & 34 V i c t . , c. 23. Income Tax A c t . S.C. 1970-71-72, c. 63, as amended. 145 Misuse of Drugs Act, 1971. 28 S t a t u t e s 500. Money Laundering C o n t r o l Act 1986, S u b t i t l e H of T i t l e I of the Ant i - D r u g Abuse A c t 1986. Mutual L e g a l A s s i s t a n c e i n C r i m i n a l Matters A c t . S.C. 1988, c. 37. N a r c o t i c C o n t r o l A c t . R.S.C. 1985, c. N - l , as amended. Organized Crime C o n t r o l A c t of 1970. Pub. L. No. 91-452, (1970) 84 S t a t . 922, c o d i f i e d i n (1982) 18 U.S.C. and 28 U.S.C. Powers of C r i m i n a l Courts A c t 1973. 1973, c. 62. Proceeds o f Crime A c t 1987 (Cwlth), 1987, No. 87. Proceeds of Crime (Miscellaneous) Act 1987 (Cwlth), 1987, No. 73. P r o t e c t i o n o f P r i v a c y A c t . S.C. 1973-74, c. 50. Racketeer I n f l u e n c e d and Corrupt O r g a n i z a t i o n s A c t . 18 U.S.C, s s . 1961-68 (1982 & Supp. IV 1986). U n i t e d Nations Convention A g a i n s t I l l i c i t T r a f f i c i n N a r c o t i c  Drugs and P s y c h o t r o p i c Substances. Vienna. 19 Dec. 1988. Un i t e d S t a t e s Code. CASES CITED Anton P i l l e r KG v. Manufacturing Processes L t d . [1976] 1 A l l E.R. 779 (C.A.). A t t o r n e y General of Quebec v. Royal Bank of Canada, e t a l . (1985) 18 C.C.C. (3d) 98, 44 C R . (3d) 387. C a l i f o r n i a v. Greenwood (1988) 56 U.S.L.W. 4409. Canadian P a c i f i c A i r l i n e s L t d . v. Hind (1981) 122 D.L>R. (3d) 498 (Ont. H.C ) . C h i e f Constable of Kent v. V. and another [1983] Q.B. 34, [1982] 3 W.L.R. 462, [1982] 3 A l l E.R. 36 (C.A.). C i t y of St . Paul v. Vaughn (1975) 237 N.W. (2d) 365 (S.C. Minn.). C o o l i d g e v. New Hampshire (1971) 29 L. Ed. (2d) 564 (U . S . S . C ) . 146 Fleming v. The Queen [1986] 1 S.C.R. 415, 25 C.C.C. (3d) 297. Her Majesty the Queen v. Shah, e t a l . 5 Dec. 1989. V i c t o r i a . 89/2488. unreported (B.C.S.C). Hester v. U.S. (1924) 265 U.S. 57 (U.S.S.C). Hunter v. Southam Inc. [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145, 14 C.C.C. (3d) 97. I n d u s t r i a l Acceptance Corp. v. The Queen [1953] 2 S.C.R. 273, 107 M c M i l l a n v. Penn. (1986) 91 L. Ed. 67 ( U . S . S . C ) . Nadeau v. R. [1984] 2 S.C.R. 570. Re A i m o n e t t i and The Queen (1977) 36 C.C.C. (2d) 91 (Man. C.A.). Re H i c k s and The Queen (1977) 36 C.C.C. (2d) 91 (Man. C.A.). Re R. and Buxton (1981) 62 C.C.C. (2d) 278 ( A l t a . Q.B.). Re R. and L a r g i e (1981) 63 C.C.C. (2d) 508 (Ont. C.A.). Ref. r e s. 94(2) of the Motor Vehicle Act (B.C.) (1985) 23 C.C.C. (3d) 289 ( S . C . C ) . R. v. B i g M Drug Mart L t d . [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295. R. v. Bouraue [1969] 4 C.C.C. 358 (B.C.C.A.). R. v. Cuthbertson [1981] A . C 470 (H.L.). R. v. Dow (1976) 1 C R . (3d) S-9 (B.C.C.A.). R. v. Dvment (1988) 66 C R . (3d) 348, 45 C.C.C (3d) 244 (S.C.C.). R. v. G a r d i n e r [1982] 2 S.C.R. 368, 68 C.C.C. (2d) 477. R. v. Gordon [1983] 4 C.C.C. (3d) 492 (Ont. C.A.). R. v. Haves [1923] 1 D.L.R. 459, 38 C.C.C. 348 ( A l t a . C.A.). R. v. Jung (1976) 1 C R . (3d) S - l (B.C.C.A.). R. v. Lachance (1962) 39 C R . 127 (Ont. C.A.). R. v. Lewis (1979) 21 A.R. 236 ( A l t a . C A . ) . R. v. L o n g t i n (1983) 41 O.R. (2d) 545 (Ont. C.A.). 147 R. v. McGregor and McGregor (1956) 116 C.C.C. 55 (Man. Q.B.). R. v. Medd (1983) 7 C.C.C. (3d) 158 (Man. C.A.). R. v. Moreau (1986) 51 C R . (3d) 209 (Ont. C.A.). R. v. Morgentaler (1988) 62 C R . (3d) 1, 37 C.C.C. (3d) 449 (S.C.C ) . R. v. Noble (1984) 42 C R . (3d) 209 (Ont. C.A.). R. v. Oakes [1986] 1 S.C.R. 103, 24 C.C.C. (3d) 321. R. v. Pope (1980) 52 C.C.C (2d) 538 (B.C.C.A.). R. v. P r o t z (1984) 13 C.C.C. (2d) 107 (Sask. C.A.). R. V. Rowley (1986) 43 M.V.R. 290 (B.C.C.A.). R. v. San s r e g r e t (1985) 45 C R . (3d) 193 ( S . C . C ) . R. v. S a u l t Ste. Marie (1978) 40 C.C.C. (2d) 353 ( S . C . C ) . R. v. Shea (1982) 38 O.R. (2d) 582 ( H . C ) . R. v. Smith (1978) 2 C R . (3d) S-35 ( N f l d . C.A.). R. v. Smith (1987) 34 C.C.C. (3d) 97 ( S . C . C ) . R. v. Smith and Smith (1985) 46 C R . (3d) 278 ( A l t a . Q.B.). R. v. T a y l o r unrep. 26 Jan. 1984 (B.C.S.C). Royal Bank of Canada v. Bouraue, e t . a l . [1984] 38 C R . (3d) 363. Sedima. S.P.R.L. v. Imrex Co. (1985) 473 U.S. 479. Smith v. The Queen (1975) 27 C.C.C. (2d) 252 (F.C.T.D.). S o l v e n t Petroleum E x t r a c t i o n Inc. v. M.N.R. (1989) 50 C.C.C. (3d) 182, 99 N.R. 22 (C.A.); 21556, 23 Nov. 1989 ( S . C . C ) . Texas v. Brown (1983) 75 L. Ed. (2d) 502 (U. S . S . C ) . U.S. v. Manning (1971) 440 F. (2d) 1105 (U.S.C.A., 5th C i r . ) . U.S. v. S a n d i n i (1987) 816 F. (2d) 869 (U.S.C.A., 3rd C i r . ) . West M e r c i a Constabulary v. Wagener and Others [1982] 1 W.L.R. 127 (Q.B.). Wilson v. The Queen [1983] 2 S.C.R. 594, 9 C.C.C. (3d) 87. 148 Woolminqton v. P.P.P. [1935] A.C. 462, 25 Cr. App. R. 72 (H.L.). AUTHORS CITEP " B i g Time Crime." (Sept. 1989) 7 E q u i t y 14. " D r a f t f o r P i s c u s s i o n - P r o t o c o l f o r Crown Counsel - B i l l C-61 - Proceeds of Crime - S.C. 1988 c. 51." unpub. paper. 15 Pec. 1988. " H i d i n g the Prug Money." Maclean's. 23 Oct. 1989. Adams, Whitney. " P r a c t i c a l Problems i n Money Laundering P r o s e c u t i o n s I n v o l v i n g F i n a n c i a l I n s t i t u t i o n s : A Oefense A t t o r n e y ' s P e r s p e c t i v e . " unpub. paper. N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e on  Economic Crime Money Laundering Conference. A l e x a n d r i a , Va. 17 May 1990. At r e n s , Jerome. The Charter and C r i m i n a l Procedure. Toronto: Butterworths, 1989. B a r t l e t t , Sarah and ot h e r s . "Money Laundering - Who's Invo l v e d , How I t Works and Where I t ' s Spreading." Business Week. 18 Mar. 1985. B a s s i o u n i , M. C h e r i f . "The I n t e r n a t i o n a l N a r c o t i c s C o n t r o l Scheme." B a s s i o u n i , ed. I n t e r n a t i o n a l C r i m i n a l Law. Volume 1 - Crimes. Pobbs F e r r y , N.Y.: T r a n s n a t i o n a l , 1986. I n t e r n a t i o n a l C r i m i n a l Law. Volume 2 - Procedure. Pobbs F e r r y , N.Y.: T r a n s n a t i o n a l , 1986. B i r k s , P e t e r . An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o the Law of R e s t i t u t i o n . Oxford: Clarendon, 1989. Black, Henry C. Blac k ' s Law P i c t i o n a r y . r e v . 4th ed. S t . Paul, Minn.: West, 1968. Brown, Pesmond H. The Genesis of the Canadian C r i m i n a l Code of 1892. Toronto: Univ. of Toronto Press, 1989. Cameron, Jamie. "The Motor V e h i c l e Reference and the Relevance of American P o c t r i n e i n Charter A d j u d i c a t i o n , " i n Robert J . Sharpe. Ch a r t e r L i t i g a t i o n . Toronto: Butterworths, 1987. 69-96. Chorafas, P i m i t r i s N. E l e c t r o n i c Funds T r a n s f e r . London: Butterworths, 1988. 149 Cross, Rupert. Evidence. 5th ed. London: Butterworths, 1979. Dept. of J u s t i c e . E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Report. Ottawa. 10 June 1983. Sentencing. Ottawa: Supply and S e r v i c e s Canada, 1984. Derby, D a n i e l H. "A Framework f o r I n t e r n a t i o n a l C r i m i n a l Law," i n B a s s i o u n i , Volume 1 - Crimes. Donald, P a t r i c i a . "A Commentary on the P r o v i s i o n s o f C-61 -Canada's New Proceeds of Crime L e g i s l a t i o n (S.C. 1988, c. 51)." (1989) 47 The Advocate 423. Minutes of Meeting. C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e S e c t i o n . Vancouver. unpub. 18 Jan. 1989. Ehrcke, W i l l a i m F. " L e t t i n g the Punishment F i t the Crime." (1990) 48 The Advocate 545. F a r r i s , John L. "Sentencing." (1975-76) 18 Crim. L. 0. 421. Fay, James B. " B a s i c P r i n c i p l e s of C r i m i n a l Law." J o e l E. Pink and David P e r r i e r . From CRIME t o PUNISHMENT - An I n t r o d u c t i o n  t o the C r i m i n a l Law System Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1988. F e l s e n f e l d , C a r l . L e g a l Aspects of E l e c t r o n i c Funds T r a n s f e r s Stoneham, Mass.: Butterworths, 1988. F i n k e l s t e i n , Jacob J . "The Goring Ox: Some H i s t o r i c a l Perspectives on the Deodands, F o r f e i t u r e s , Wrongful Death and the Western N o t i o n of Sovereignty." (1973) 46 Temple L.Q. 169. F r e i b e r g , A r i e . " R i p p l e s from the Bottom of the Harbour: Some S o c i a l R a m i f i c a t i o n s of Ta x a t i o n Fraud." (1988) 12 Cr. L. J . 136. F r i e d , David J . " R a t i o n a l i z i n g C r i m i n a l F o r f e i t u r e . " (1988) J .  Crim. L. & Crim. 328. G a l l a g h e r , G. P a t r i c k . Asset F o r f e i t u r e - The Management and  D i s p o s i t i o n of Seize d A s s e t s . Washington: Bureau of J u s t i c e A s s i s t a n c e , Nov. 1988. Gold, A l a n D. Proceeds of Crime - A Manual w i t h Commentary on  B i l l C-61. Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989. Goldsmith, M i c h a e l . Asset F o r f e i t u r e - C i v i l F o r f e i t u r e : T r a c i n g  the Proceeds of N a r c o t i c s T r a f f i c k i n g . Washington: Dept. of J u s t i c e , Nov. 1988. Goyer, George A. Proceeds of Crime. Vancouver: C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l 150 E d u c a t i o n S o c i e t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1990. H a l l , Jerome. Law, S o c i a l Science and C r i m i n a l Theory. L i t t l e t o n , C o l o . : Rothman, 1982. Hodgson, S i r Derek. P r o f i t s of Crime and T h e i r Recovery. London: Heinemann E d u c a t i o n a l Books L t d . , 1974. Hogarth, John. " E n t e r p r i s e Crime Study Report" - A C r i t i q u e . Rome. 15 Dec. 1983. Sentencing as a Human Process. Toronto: Univ. of Toronto P r e s s , 1971. House of Commons Debates. 14 Sep. 1987. I n v e r a r i t y , James M., Pat Lauderdale and B a r r y C. F e l d . Law and  S o c i e t y - S o c i o l o g i c a l P e r s p e c t i v e s on C r i m i n a l Law. Boston: L i t t l e , Brown, 1983. Jensen, Holger. " H i d i n g the Drug Money." Maclean's. 23 Oct. 1989. Kenny, Courtney S. O u t l i n e s of C r i m i n a l Law, r e v . 15th ed. G. Godfrey P h i l l i p s . Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1942. Kerans, Roger P. "The Future of S e c t i o n One of the C h a r t e r . " (1989) U.B.C. L. Rev. 567-77. King, Rufus. "A Worthless Crusade." Newsweek. 1 Jan. 1990. Law Reform Commission of Canada. C r i m i n a l Law - The G e n e r a l P a r t :  L i a b i l i t y and Defences. Working Paper No. 29. Ottawa: Supply and S e r v i c e s Canada, 1982. Law S o c i e t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. "New Proceeds of Crime L e g i s l a t i o n . " [1989] 10 Benchers' B u l l e t i n 2. LeDain, GeraId. F i n a l Report of the Commission of I n q u i r y i n t o  the Non-Medical Use of Drugs. Ottawa: I n f o r m a t i o n Canada, 1973. Lenck, W i l l i a m . A s s e t F o r f e i t u r e - T r a c k i n g Drug Proceeds: Bank  Secrecy A c t Reports. Washington: Bureau of J u s t i c e A s s i s t a n c e , Sept. 1989. MacFarlane, Bruce A. " C o n f i s c a t i n g the F r u i t s of Crime" (1984-85) 27 Crim. L. 0. 408. Drug Offences i n Canada. Aurora: Canada Law Book Inc., 1986. " L e g a l V e h i c l e s Leading t o F o r f e i t u r e Under P a r t X . l of the C r i m i n a l Code." unpub. paper. NCPC. 151 Malarek, V i c t o r . Merchants of Misery. Toronto: M c C l e l l a n d and Stewart, 1989. M a r t i n , E l i z a b e t h A. ed. The Concise D i c t i o n a r y of Law. Oxford: Univ. Press, 1983. McCrank, N e i l . " F o r f e i t u r e P r o v i s i o n s of B i l l C-61." NCPC. McDonald, David. L e g a l R i g h t s i n the Canadian C h a r t e r of R i g h t s  and Freedoms. 2nd ed. Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989. M c l n t y r e , J i l l and Alexander G. Henderson. The Busi n e s s o f Crime - An E v a l u a t i o n of the American "Racketeer I n f l u e n c e d and  Corru p t O r g a n i z a t i o n s " S t a t u t e from a Canadian P e r s p e c t i v e - E x e c u t i v e Summary and D r a f t Amendments t o the " C r i m i n a l  Code" M i n i s t r y of Attorney-General, C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e D i v i s i o n , 1980. McLeod, Roderick M. The Canadian C h a r t e r of R i g h t s - The  P r o s e c u t i o n and Defence of C r i m i n a l and o t h e r S t a t u t o r y  O f f e n c e s , v o l . 2. Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1983. Mewett, A. W. "The C r i m i n a l Law, 1867-1967." (1967) 45 Can. B.  Rev. 726. Mewett, A l a n W. and M o r r i s Manning. C r i m i n a l Law. Toronto: Butterworth, 1985. Morton, James. The C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e A c t s 1987 and 1988 - A  Commentary London: Waterlow, 1988. Mosley, R i c h a r d G. " S e i z i n g the Proceeds of Crime: The O r i g i n s and Main Features of Canada's C r i m i n a l F o r f e i t u r e L e g i s l a t i o n , " unpub. paper. NCPC. Nossen, R i c h a r d A. The D e t e c t i o n . I n v e s t i g a t i o n and P r o s e c u t i o n of  F i n a n c i a l Crimes (White C o l l a r . P o l i t i c a l C o r r u p t i o n and  R a c k e t e e r i n g ) . Richmond, Va.: Nossen & Assocs., 1982. Packer, He r b e r t . The L i m i t s of the C r i m i n a l S a n c t i o n . S t a n f o r d : S t a n f o r d Univ. Press, 1968. "Two Models of the C r i m i n a l Process." (1964) 113 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1 Parker, Graham. An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o C r i m i n a l Law. 3rd ed. Toronto: Methuen, 1987. Posner, G e r a l d L. Warlords of Crime - Chinese S e c r e t S o c i e t i e s : The  New M a f i a . New York: Penguin, 1990. 152 P r i c e , David G. " P o l i c e S e i z u r e of Bank Accounts Under S e c t i o n 29, C r i m i n a l Law Amendment Act, 1975." (1976-77) 19 Crim. L.  0. 86. Purdy, B r i a n . " S p e c i a l Search Warrants and R e s t r a i n t Orders." NCPC. R a n d a l l , Kenneth C. " U n i v e r s a l J u r i s d i c t i o n Under I n t e r n a t i o n a l Law." (1988) 66 Texas L. Rev. 785. Rogerson, C a r o l . "The J u d i c i a l Search f o r A p p r o p r i a t e Remedies Under the C h a r t e r : The Examples of Overbreadth and Vagueness," i n Robert J . Sharpe. ed. C h a r t e r L i t i g a t i o n . Toronto: Butterworths, 1987. 233-306. Ryan, H.R.S. "Annotation" (1985) 46 C R . (3d) 278. S a i n t - D e n i s , P a u l . "Rights of the Accused, T h i r d P a r t y R i g h t s , and Due P r o c e s s . " NCPC. "The U n i t e d Nations Convention A g a i n s t I l l i c i t T r a f f i c i n N a r c o t i c Drugs and P s y c h o t r o p i c Substances." unpub. paper. NCPC. S h e l d r i c k , Byron. " S h i f t i n g Burdens and Required I n f e r e n c e s : The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y of Reverse Onus C l a u s e s " (1986) 44 U. of  Toronto Fac. L. Rev. 179. S o l i c i t o r General of Canada. The RICO S t a t u t e : An Overview, n.p. June 1982. S t u a r t , Don. Canadian C r i m i n a l Law - A T r e a t i s e . Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1987. Sweeney, Joseph C. "An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o RICO." (1987) 12 T u l . Mar.  Law J . 7. Tyree, A l a n L. Banking Law i n A u s t r a l i a . Sydney: Butterworths, 1990. Waldman, Steven and Mark M i l l e r . "The Drug Lawyers." Newsweek 13 Nov. 1989. Walker, C P . "Opening the V a u l t s - P o l i c e Powers and Bank Accounts." (1983) Cr. L. Rev. 723. Weddell, B r i a n . " B i l l C-61 - Proposed C r i m i n a l Code Amendments -Proceeds of Crime." unpub. paper. Canadian Bar Assoc..  C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e Subsection. Kamloops 1989. W h i t l e y , S t u a r t J . C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e and the C o n s t i t u t i o n . Toronto: C a r s w e l l , 1989. 153 W i l l i a m s , G l a n v i l l e . C r i m i n a l Law - The General P a r t . 2nd ed. London: Stevens and Sons, 1961. Textbook of C r i m i n a l Law. 2nd ed. London: Stevens and Sons, 1983. Young, Kenneth. "Memorandum Re: B i l l C-61." unpub. paper. C r i m i n a l J u s t i c e S e c t i o n . B.C. Branch. Canadian Bar Assoc.. Vancouver, 18 Jan. 1989. "Proceeds of Crime." The Drug Case. Vancouver: C o n t i n u i n g L e g a l Education S o c i e t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Mar. 1990. Z a g a r i s , Bruce and Marcus Bornheim. " F o r e i g n and I n t e r n a t i o n a l Money Laundering Laws." American Bar Assoc., Crim. J u s t i c e Sec. Manual on Money Laundering. 8 Mar. 1990. Z e l d i n , M i c h a e l F., Harry S. Harbin and S t e f a n D. C a s s e l l a . Money  Laundering F o r f e i t u r e s , rev. ed. Washington: Dept. of J u s t i c e , 11 May 1990. NEWSPAPERS CITED Canadian P o l i c e C h i e f Newsletter. Oct. 1989, Nov. 1989. Gaz e t t e . M o n t r e a l . 15 Feb. 1989 Globe and M a i l . Toronto. 23 Aug. 1989, 19 Feb. 1990. N a t i o n a l . Toronto, n.d. Ottawa Sunday Sun. 12 Feb. 1990. P r o v i n c e . Vancouver. 5 Feb. 1990. Sunday S t a r . Toronto. 2 J u l y 1989. T i m e s - C o l o n i s t . V i c t o r i a . 29 Sept. 1989, 22 Oct. 1989, 25 Mar. 1990, 17 May 1990. Vancouver Sun. 9 Nov. 1989. 154 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0077719/manifest

Comment

Related Items