<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Hlakanaphila Analytics &#187; Asset forfeiture</title>
	<atom:link href="http://analysis.quanta.org.za/archive/asset-forfeiture/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://analysis.quanta.org.za</link>
	<description>a research organisation dedicated to excellence in quantitative analysis</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:27:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Prophet no poster boy for forfeiture critics</title>
		<link>http://analysis.quanta.org.za/2007/03/30/prophet-no-poster-boy-for-forfeiture-critics/</link>
		<comments>http://analysis.quanta.org.za/2007/03/30/prophet-no-poster-boy-for-forfeiture-critics/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:14:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asset forfeiture]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.quanta.org.za/analysis/2007/03/30/prophet-no-poster-boy-for-forfeiture-critics/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Robert Vivian writing in Business Day on 13 March 2007Â  uses the case of Simon Prophet as an example of how our courts collude in flouting rights by allowing the application of civil asset forfeiture legislation. Yet his argument contains inaccuracies and elisions of truth. Jean Redpath of Hlakanaphila Analytics puts the record straight [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a title="Robert Vivian writing in Business Day on 13 March 2007" href="http://analysis.quanta.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/robertvivianbreakingeverysafeguard.PDF">Robert Vivian writing in Business Day on 13 March 2007</a>Â  uses the case of Simon Prophet as an example of how our courts collude in flouting rights by allowing the application of civil asset forfeiture legislation. Yet his argument contains inaccuracies and elisions of truth. <a title="Prophet no poster boy" href="http://analysis.quanta.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/Prophet%20no%20poster%20boy%20for%20forfeiture%20critics.pdf">Jean Redpath of Hlakanaphila Analytics puts the record straight</a> and argues that in the case of Simon Prophet, justice was done.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://analysis.quanta.org.za/2007/03/30/prophet-no-poster-boy-for-forfeiture-critics/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
