When you hear of civil forfeiture, you may think back to John Oliver’s viral critique of its use in the United States. Perhaps you have never heard of this statutory scheme before. What few realize is that civil forfeiture has been the subject of public debate for decades, with policy objectives like crime deterrence forming the foundation of its supporters’ arguments and due process and property rights concerns animating its critics’.
In this episode, Host Gefen Shpil explores the two sides of the civil forfeiture debate to provide viewers with the tools to decide for themselves the answer to the following question: Does the current Canadian civil forfeiture scheme appropriately balance crime deterrence and individual rights so that its efficacy justifies possible intrusions on those rights? The episode will explore the arguments of both sides of the debate, starting with the policy rationales that proponents of civil forfeiture rely on to justify its use. Second, listeners will hear criticisms of the statutory schemes, focusing on concerns about due process and property rights. Along the way, listeners will hear how courts in Canada have treated civil forfeiture statutes and challenges to them. Lastly, the episode will explore whether Civil forfeiture has actually been successful in achieving its goal. Spoiler alert…it’s difficult to say!
By the end of this episode, you will have a strong understanding of how civil forfeiture operates in Ontario and the tools to decide where you stand on this debate. Do you think the ends justify the means?
Gefen Shpil – Producer, Host, Editor
Pro Bono Radio is part of the Queen’s chapter of Pro Bono Students Canada. The Pro Bono Radio team are not lawyers, and this is not legal advice.
Subscribe to this podcast on Apple Podcasts, Google Play, Spotify and Stitcher!
Research Referred to in the Podcast:
J. Simser, Civil Asset Forfeiture in Canada (December 2020)/
J. Simser, “Perspectives on Civil Forfeiture” in S.N.M. Yong, ed, Civil Forfeiture of Criminal Property (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009).
M. Gallant & C. King, “The Seizure of Illicit Assets: Patterns of Civil Forfeiture in Canada and Ireland” (2013) 42:1 Common Law World Review.
Civil Remedies Act, 2001, SO 2001, c 28.
A.X. Fellmeth, “Civil and Criminal Sanctions in the Constitution and Courts” (2005) 94:1 Georgetown LJ.
Chatterjee v Ontario (Attorney General), 2009 SCC 19 [Chatterjee].
Ontario (Attorney General) v Cole-Watson, 2007 CanLII 15229.
R.T. Naylor, “License to Loot? A Critique of Follow-the-Money Methods in Crime Control Policy” (2001) 28:3 Social Justice.
R.T Naylor, “Criminal Profits, Terror Dollars and Nonsense” (2007) Transnational Institute.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS