I didn't want to join in some of the other threads relating to Justice
Minister Allan Rock's rejection of a Montreal police request for new
legislation to deal with Biker Gangs. Those threads had started out on
the usual note of Quebec versus Canada that corrupts and disenables any
reasoned discussion of real issues in Canadian federal politics.
My question is simply this: Why is there no RICO (Racketeer Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations) statute in Canada as there is the United
States?
I would appreciate replies from lawyers, police officers, and others who
are knowledgeable in this area. And from any racketeers and mobsters
who may wish to provide some enlightening information from the other side
of the street.
Rod
Hello from the future.
The simple answer is that there *is* a RICO statute in Canada. It's just not Canadian law. The issue is one of construement of statute. A dispute between a Canadian province and a US State would be "interstate commerce" See EEOC v. ARABIAN AMERICAN OIL CO.
In Canada a Special Prosecutor or Private Attorney General under the Civil RICO Act would be more analogous to an Ombuds or Auditor General accountable only to Parliament without any limitations imposed by politically elected government (Prosecutorial Immunity).
ROTELLA V. WOOD (98-896) 528 U.S. 549 (2000) 147 F.3d 438:
"There is a clear legislative record of congressional reliance on the Clayton Act when RICO was under consideration, and the Clayton Act’s injury-focused accrual rule was well established by the time civil RICO was enacted. Both statutes share a common congressional objective of encouraging civil litigation not merely to compensate victims but also to turn them into private attorneys general, supplementing Government efforts by undertaking litigation in the public good."
Turiyan