B.C.'s attorney general, David Eby, has generated a national profile with his high-wattage crusade against money laundering.

But a well-respected organization that used to employ him has raised serious concerns about the direction his NDP government is going on this file.

Prior to being elected as an MLA in Vancouver–Point Grey in 2013, Eby spent five years as the executive director of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

And that very same BCCLA has released a fairly damning opening statement that it will deliver next week at the Commission of Inquiry Into Money Laundering in British Columbia.

"In reviewing the numerous recommendations found in Provincial Reports, certain common threads emerge that have potentially grave implications for the privacy rights and civil liberties of Canadians," BCCLA senior counsel Emily Lapper and staff counsel Megan Tweedie wrote.

These "threads" include:

* recommendations to increase amount and types of data being collected by public and private institutions, as well as increasing the sharing of that personal and confidential data;

* recommendations to increase the presence and powers of police and regulatory investigators in the gaming sector;

* and recommendations for "invasive remedies such as civil forfeiture and the introduction of unexplained wealth orders".

"The BCCLA has long been an opponent of civil asset forfeiture laws, pursuant to which an individual who has not been charged or convicted of a crime can lose their property to the government," Lapper and Tweedie wrote. "The BCCLA has spoken out against the incentives the legislation creates for government abuse and the barriers ordinary people face representing themselves in civil forfeiture cases".

In addition, the BCCLA stated that the introduction of unexplained wealth orders is "deeply concerning" because they erode privacy rights and do away with the presumption of innocence, That, the lawyers sate, subverts "the rights that shield Canadians from unreasonable search and seizure."

Moreover, they pointed out that these unexplained wealth orders are issued under a reverse-onus scheme. This means that the property owner must prove that legitimate income was used rather than the government having to prove its case.

In addition, a recommendation to create a transaction analysis team to review suspicious transaction reports doesn't consider "the serious privacy implications of mass data-sharing between agencies and fails to provide appropriate measures to safeguard the personal information of Canadians".

"The BCCLA is also concerned that no credible, verifiable evidence has yet been produced which suggests that a data-sharing framework would be effective in combatting money laundering," Lapper and Tweedie wrote.

As for the proposal for a designated police unit to police casinos and gaming activity, the BCCLA stated that it's "critical" to ensure that it does not operate in a "rights-infringing manner".

It called for further independent research to evaluate the efficacy and potential impact of a designated policing unit on affected communities and its possible duplication of work done by other agency.

In addition, the BCCLA wants consultation conducted with the information and privacy commissioner to create a policy on data collection, protection, and retention.

The BCCLA would also like to see a comprehensive and independent review of the Joint Illegal Gaming Investigation Team.

"The BCCLA recognizes that the possible social and political costs of money laundering, if left unchecked or dealt with ineffectively, are serious," Lapper and Tweedie wrote in their conclusion. "However, developing an effective AML [anti-money-laundering] regime cannot simply reflect calls for more invasive powers, broader disclosures of sensitive, highly prejudicial information, and more resources for policing and FINTRAC. The implications for the rights and liberties of Canadians must form a part of the analysis."