section 32(2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Military personnel are justified in obeying a superior officers command in suppressing a riot unless the order is blatantly illegal.

SECTION WORDING

32(2) Every one who is bound by military law to obey the command of his superior officer is justified in obeying any command given by his superior officer for the suppression of a riot unless the order is manifestly unlawful.

EXPLANATION

Section 32(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a defense for military personnel who are bound to follow orders from their superiors. Specifically, this section states that any member of the military who receives a command from a superior officer in the context of suppressing a riot is justified in obeying that command unless the command is deemed "manifestly unlawful". In practical terms, this means that military members who are deployed to a riot situation (such as the deployment of the Canadian Armed Forces to assist with riot control in some cities across Canada) are legally permitted to obey the orders of their superiors when responding to the riot. However, this defense is not absolute- if the orders given clearly violate civilian laws or are unethical in some other way, the military member would still be held accountable for their actions. The purpose of this provision is to protect military personnel from legal repercussions when they are following orders in the context of an emergency situation. It recognizes that in certain scenarios, quick and decisive action is required in order to protect the public and bring a dangerous situation under control. By allowing military members to rely on the orders of their superiors in these situations, the section provides a legal framework for the use of force when it is necessary to protect public safety.

COMMENTARY

Section 32(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada establishes a defence for members of the military who have been commanded to suppress riots by their superiors. This defence is grounded in the principle of obedience to authority, which is a fundamental value within a hierarchical organization like the military. However, as the section makes clear, this defence is not absolute and can be negated if the order is "manifestly unlawful." The legal concept of obedience to authority has been the subject of much debate and controversy within both law and psychology. On one hand, obedience to authority can be seen as a necessary element of maintaining order and discipline in hierarchical organizations such as the military. On the other hand, obedience to authority has been implicated in some of the worst atrocities in human history, including the atrocities committed by Nazi soldiers during World War II. These atrocities highlight the dangers of blindly following orders without questioning their moral or legal implications. In the context of section 32(2), the defence of obedience to authority can be seen as a necessary element of military discipline. In order for a military organization to function effectively, soldiers must be capable of carrying out orders quickly and efficiently, even in high-stress situations. This requires a degree of blind obedience, as individual soldiers may not have all the information or context necessary to fully understand why a particular order is being given. However, this blind obedience can be dangerous if it is not accompanied by a strong moral compass. Soldiers must be able to recognize when an order is "manifestly unlawful" and have the courage to refuse to carry it out. The term "manifestly unlawful" is intentionally broad, as it is meant to encompass orders that are illegal, immoral, or contrary to the principles of international law. Soldiers who carry out such orders can be held criminally liable, even if they were following the orders of their superiors. Section 32(2) reflects this delicate balance between the need for obedience to authority and the need for soldiers to be able to exercise moral judgment. By providing a defence for soldiers who carry out orders to suppress riots, the section recognizes the importance of military discipline and the need for soldiers to follow orders. At the same time, the section also recognizes that soldiers must be able to distinguish between lawful and unlawful orders, and that they can be held accountable if they fail to do so. Overall, section 32(2) is a necessary and balancing provision that recognizes the importance of maintaining military discipline while also safeguarding against the danger of blind obedience. Military organizations play a critical role in maintaining law and order, and section 32(2) allows them to carry out this function while also ensuring that soldiers do not act with impunity.

STRATEGY

Section 32(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada, which provides legal justification for military personnel to obey commands given by their superiors during riot suppression, is a complex issue with various strategic considerations. Firstly, it is essential to understand that the term "manifestly unlawful" is not explicitly defined in the Criminal Code. This term is often used in military law and requires a comprehensive analysis of the specific circumstances surrounding the command given by the superior officer. It is crucial to determine whether the command was given in good faith, whether the officer had the authority to give the order, and whether the order was excessive or disproportionate in relation to the situation at hand. When dealing with Section 32(2) of the Criminal Code, it is vital to recognize the potential for abuse of authority by the superior officer giving the order. The use of force during a riot can quickly escalate, and it's necessary to ensure that superior officers provide clear and concise instructions to their subordinates, focused on de-escalation and protection of the public, rather than brute force. Another strategic consideration is the importance of maintaining public trust and confidence in the military. The use of force, especially in a democratic society such as Canada, can be viewed as heavy-handed and lead to a deterioration of public trust in the military. Therefore, military personnel must be trained to act appropriately and professionally in crowd control situations. In terms of strategies that could be employed, education and training are essential. Proper training will ensure that military personnel understand their legal obligations and the consequences of disobeying orders, as well as the importance of public confidence and democratic principles when dealing with public disturbances. Moreover, it is crucial to establish clear lines of communication between superior officers and subordinates during riot suppression. Enhancing communication can help ensure that instructions and orders are clear, concise, and lawful, and risk exposure to any wrongdoing by military personnel can be mitigated. In conclusion, dealing with Section 32(2) of the Criminal Code in Canada requires a nuanced approach focused on striking a balance between the legal obligation for military personnel to obey superior officers in the suppression of riots and the need to maintain public confidence in the military. By using training, clear communication, and strategic planning, military leaders can ensure their personnel operate lawfully, protecting both civilians and the integrity of the Canadian Armed Forces.