FWS Proposes Changes to Seizure and Forfeiture Procedures
The Fish and Wildlife Service is considering regulatory changes governing FWS procedures for seizures and forfeitures, the agency said in a notice (here). "This proposed rule will make the current regulations easier to understand through the use of simpler language and will also more clearly explain the procedures used in administrative forfeiture proceedings," the agency said. Among the proposed changes are revised or new definitions, it said. Comments are due Aug. 16.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
One revision would change the definition of "contraband" to prevent "a good faith defense" in wildlife forfeiture cases, FWS said. "To permit an importer to recover the property because he or she lacks culpability would lend support to the continued commercial traffic of the forbidden wildlife," the agency said. "Additionally, a foreseeable consequence would be to discourage diligent inquiry by the importer, allowing him or her to plead ignorance in the face of an import violation. Furthermore, it is not unreasonable to expect the importer to protect his or her interest by placing the risk of noncompliance on the supplier in negotiation of the sales agreement."
The proposal also includes mitigating factors to be considered as part of forfeiture remissions. One such factor FWS would consider when it reviews petitions for remission would be "whether the petitioner has undertaken diligent inquiry into the compliance capability and record of any foreign supplier, FWS said. "Rewarding ignorance of an import violation through remission could discourage the diligent inquiry that might have prevented the violation from occurring."
(Federal Register 06/17/16)