This one sneaked past me last year.
Russian oligarchs suspected of corruption will be forced to explain their luxury lifestyles in the UK, the security minister has said.
As part of an organised crime crackdown, Ben Wallace told The Times officials could now seize suspicious assets worth more than £50,000.
He added wealthy foreign criminals would feel the “full force of government”.
It is estimated £90bn of illegal cash is laundered in the UK each year.
Unexplained Wealth Orders, which came into force on 31 January, force wealthy people to explain the source of their assets if there is reason to suspect corruption.
They allow government officials to keep hold of assets including property until they have been properly accounted for.
In the interview with the paper, the security minister warned: “We will come for you, for your assets and we will make the environment you live in difficult.”
Right. Of course, it will be the Russian Oligarchs and not the average Joe who will fall foul of this foul legislation, won’t it? No one should have to explain themselves to the state without clear evidence of wrongdoing and then in a court of law with twelve jurors in place. Until then, the rule of law and due process must apply to everyone equally. What this nasty little piece of legislation does is allow the organs of the state to go after anyone they choose without due process. That it is evil should be obvious. However, read this story on any of the progressive outlets and you get the usual “nothing to hide nothing to fear” canard being rolled out.
How easily, does a tyranny take force.
It should be obvious to anyone with a grain of sense that, in the absence of due process, the phrase will be ‘nothing to hide but still plenty to fear’. If the state is going to declare you guilty without going through any of that tiresome procedure of proving it, then how is being totally innocent going to get you off the hook?
For most people it won’t be possible. Until they’ve wasted at least ten years in pointless legal bickering with dunderheaded civil servants to recover amounts like GBP55,000 that was their life savings.
The Russian ‘Oligarchs’ will have already moved to another, less onerous regime ahead of this shitty little tax grab. Or bribed enough politicians to leave them be. They can afford it.
This was always going to be a means of getting at the little guy.
Dear Mr Sticker
Maybe it is a way of encouraging bribes to be paid to our wonderful politicians and bureaucrats.
After all, if they want a little bribery and corruption to flow their way, target those who are doing it already and have no qualms about splashing the cash at third world officials, like themselves.
It also helps to re-inforce the ‘guilty until you have proven yourself innocent at vast personal expense’ motif which is where our beloved government™ would like us to end up.
DP
“Innocent until proven guilty” is the fashion. Hashtag #metoo.
A nefarious extension of adding yet more power to Brown’s merger of HMIR & HMC
HMRC assume guilt of smuggling and confiscate alcohol/tobacco in ports/airports with no PACE obligations and alleged smuggler must prove their innocence.
FFS, we’re leaving EU, stop & roll back this incorporating Napoleonic law into UK Law.
First, define ‘wealthy’…!
Anyone who has more than me. Standard socialist definition.
And looking at the residences of the Scargills, Hattons, McCluskeys, etc. of this world, it also includes “Anyone who has a damned sight less than me”.
That’s because some are more equal than others.
I’m pretty sure this contravenes the 1689 Bill of Rights. You cannot fine someone unless you take them to court. If you wish to pay say the PCN then that’s your issue. Essentially the Bill says that “That all Grants and Promises of Fines and Forfeitures of particular persons before Conviction are illegal and void. You can’t impose excessive fines or cruel and unjust punishments either.
The Bill also contains this “And I doe declare That noe Forreigne Prince Person Prelate, State or Potentate hath or ought to have any Jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authoritie Ecclesiasticall or Spirituall within this Realme Soe helpe me God.”
Which means that anybody supporting the EU is in contravention of this Bill – and it IS A MAJOR Constitutional Act
Looks like Bernie Ecclestone is the first to feel the cold hand of HMRC on his shoulder…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5349145/Bernie-Ecclestone-questioned-caution-HMRC.html