Skip to main content

File #: 7983581 Male Hand male hand and arm reaching for something. personal editing Credit: hans slegers / iStockphoto (Royalty-Free)

hans slegers/Getty Images/iStockphoto

The B.C. Civil Forfeiture Office is getting more and more ingenious – too ingenious.

This month, Seyed Nima Razavi Zadeh was convicted of sexual assault. He is in custody pending sentencing. In the interim, the CFO is moving to seize his condominium, which he bought nine years ago for $290,000. The CFO will argue that the condominium unit was a "staging ground" for his crime and possibly others.

Yes, Mr. Razavi Zadeh committed a crime, was convicted and will be sentenced. But the civil forfeiture law was created to go after the proceeds of organized crime. In this case, as in many others, the CFO is stretching the law far beyond its original intent and beyond what the Charter of Rights and Freedoms should allow. Does his crime justify the expropriation of his property without compensation, or even making him homeless?

Story continues below advertisement

Odd enough as this case is, at least it involves an actual criminal offence. B.C.'s CFO has a long history of seizing property from people convicted of nothing.

Consider this: Five years ago, the RCMP entered a house in Surrey, B.C., suspecting a grow-op. A safe was found in a three-year-old child's bedroom; there was $129,820 inside. The child's father, Dennis Johnson, said he kept thousands of dollars at home because he didn't believe in banks and didn't trust them. Charges were laid.

But three years later, a provincial court judge threw out the charges of marijuana production and theft of electricity because of delay. The Johnsons are also pursuing a remedy for what they say were Charter breaches when the police entered their house.

Enter the Civil Forfeiture Office. It is suing the Johnsons in a civil claim for unpaid electricity. The local electricity authority was not the plaintiff, but rather the CFO, which now has a lengthy history of incongruous, sometimes oppressive claims, often against people with a tenuous connection to an offence, alleged or proven.

In mid-July, Justice Miriam Maisonville of the B.C. Supreme Court decided to split off the Johnsons' Charter breach claims from the CFO's alleged siphoning off of electricity. But there is no longer any underlying offence that could entitle the CFO to the $129,820 and other chunks of cash that were lying about.

These bizarre underpinnings for forfeiture of property resemble Charles Dickens' Bleak House or, much further back, Aristophanes' The Wasps. The B.C. Civil Forfeiture Office is becoming a satire – of itself. But if you're its target, you aren't laughing.

Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies