Amendment VI. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of Counsel for his defence.
The informer is 'bearing witness' to the act that is resulting in criminal prosecution [or is the police seizure/arrest not part of prosecution? It has to be that apprehension _is_ part of the prosecution.]; that the 'witness' against them is not [yet] in a court of law is irrelevant.
I think the whole incident is wrong, but I don’t think this would fall under that statute. I’m sure you sign some sort of waiver when you get a liquor license that allows this sort of raid. Additionally, now that the raid has taken place, the “witness” or “accuser” is now the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, not the informant.
Not a criminal prosecution, just a civil matter, so the jack booted thugs can do what they want, like make you prove you are not violating the law.
This is forcible tax collection.