Since the election of the National government I increasingly find myself lining up with the Greens. Only they and the Maori Party opposed the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill. This is another 'guilty until proven innocent' adoption. Until now assets could only be confiscated on conviction of a crime. Now it will be possible to confiscate on suspicion.
From the Bill;
"Civil action will be able to target property that has been acquired as a result of unlawful activity even though it may not be possible to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the owner has committed a specific criminal offence."
Now law.
The powers of the state are quietly expanding under our noses. And I am devastated (not too strong a word) yet again, that the very party I thought would oppose this business strongly, voted yes. And it didn't even have to.
JAG – #91 – S05 E07
57 minutes ago
5 comments:
I know what you mean. I very nearly went to last night's Drinking Liberally event in town. Met Turei was guest speaker.
The previous confiscation law was primarily used to take farms off alleged dope growers. I don't see this revised law focusing on the Al Capones of P, just more asset seizures on the small fry dope growers.
Perhaps we should have a 'drowning our sorrows' Liberally get-together:-))
The state already had the power to take away assets from people whom they suspected of illegal activities. It is called an IRD audit. How can you pay for this Harley, thei 4WD and this house when you have a declared income of $14,000 benefit money? Simple.
You should not be surprised at all, Lindsay. Quite often principled politicians make unprincipled decisions in the name of political expediency.
Rodney Hide may be a nice person, but he has yet to deliver tangible proof himself and ACT are for freedom and liberty.
Call me a cynic, but four months into this government I haven't seen single proof of ACT's political influence.
Could it be another case of the baubles of office syndrome?
Lining up with the Greens?? Oh yeah, like they (and the racists) are concerned because its an example of "guilty without trial". Get real.
Post a Comment