New Burden of Proof Legislation

Pause Icon

Outside the Order of Precedence

C-313
February 9, 2023 (2 years ago)
Canadian Federal
Frank Caputo
Conservative
House of Commons
Third reading
0 Votes
Full Title: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (justification for detention in custody)
Criminal Justice
Social Issues

Summary

The proposed amendments to the Criminal Code would change the requirements for detained individuals seeking release before trial, especially for serious crimes. This legislation would increase the burden of proof on the accused, making it more challenging for them to argue that their continued detention is unjustified in certain circumstances.

What it means for you

Groups that may be impacted include individuals accused of serious crimes, particularly those with limited resources to defend themselves, and marginalized communities who might be disproportionately affected by these changes. Victims of crime may feel a heightened sense of safety, while advocates for civil liberties may be concerned about how these amendments could compromise rights.

Expenses

The financial impact of these amendments could be significant. Longer periods of pre-trial detention may increase costs for the criminal justice system, as it involves expenses in operating jails and addressing the needs of detained individuals. Taxpayers could see a rise in government spending to accommodate the potentially higher number of inmates held longer without trial.

Proponents view

Supporters believe these changes are necessary to protect public safety. By raising the burden of proof for the accused, they argue that it prevents dangerous individuals from being prematurely released back into the community, thus reducing the risk of recidivism and promoting public trust in the justice system. They see this as prioritizing the safety of victims and society at large.

Opponents view

Critics worry that enforcing a higher burden of proof could result in wrongful detentions and extend the time innocent individuals spend in jail. This could particularly harm marginalized populations who may struggle to mount effective legal defenses. Furthermore, they argue that the financial implications could burden taxpayers and question whether these measures will truly enhance public safety or instead foster a culture of fear that undermines the presumption of innocence.

Original Bill