section 462.38(3)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section defines when a person is deemed to have absconded in connection with a designated offence in relation to the issuance of an arrest warrant or summons.

SECTION WORDING

462.38(3) For the purposes of this section, a person shall be deemed to have absconded in connection with a designated offence if (a) an information has been laid alleging the commission of the offence by the person, (b) a warrant for the arrest of the person or a summons in respect of an organization has been issued in relation to that information, and (c) reasonable attempts to arrest the person pursuant to the warrant or to serve the summons have been unsuccessful during the period of six months commencing on the day the warrant or summons was issued, or, in the case of a person who is not or never was in Canada, the person cannot be brought within that period to the jurisdiction in which the warrant or summons was issued, and the person shall be deemed to have so absconded on the last day of that period of six months.

EXPLANATION

Section 462.38(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the concept of absconding in connection with designated offences. This section allows authorities to consider a person to have absconded if they have been issued a warrant or summons related to a designated offence and the authorities have made efforts to locate and arrest the person for six months with no success. This provision empowers authorities to take certain actions such as seizing the person's property, freezing their assets, or obtaining a forfeiture order in relation to the designated offence. The law considers a person to have absconded on the last day of the six-month period if they cannot be brought before the court. This provision is important for combating organized crime groups, fraudsters, and other criminals who may attempt to evade prosecution by leaving the jurisdiction. Section 462.38(3) makes it harder for criminals to escape justice by allowing authorities to declare them absconded and take action against their assets. It is a tool for law enforcement to make sure that individuals who are responsible for serious crimes do not escape punishment, and it helps to maintain the overall integrity of the criminal justice system.

COMMENTARY

Section 462.38(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the circumstances under which a person can be deemed to have absconded in connection with a designated offence. Absconding refers to the act of fleeing or hiding to avoid prosecution or the full consequences of the law for an alleged act of criminality. This definition of absconding is particularly important in the context of crimes that carry severe penalties. To be deemed to have absconded in connection with a designated offence, three conditions must be met. The first condition is the laying of an information that alleges the commission of the offence by the person. An information is a document filed by a prosecutor that initiates criminal proceedings against an accused person or organization. The second condition is that a warrant for the arrest of the person or a summons in respect of an organization has been issued in relation to that information. A warrant is a formal document issued by a court or judge authorizing law enforcement officials to arrest a person suspected of committing a crime. A summons, on the other hand, is a notice issued by a court that requires the accused person to appear in court at a specific time and date to answer to the charges. Finally, the third condition for being deemed to have absconded is that reasonable attempts to arrest the person pursuant to the warrant or to serve the summons have been unsuccessful during the period of six months commencing on the day the warrant or summons was issued. In the case of a person who is not or never was in Canada, the person cannot be brought within that period to the jurisdiction in which the warrant or summons was issued. It is important to note that a person can only be deemed to have absconded on the last day of that period of six months. This means that the person is not considered an absconder until the expiry of the six-month period during which reasonable attempts to arrest them have been unsuccessful. The purpose of this section of the Criminal Code of Canada is to enable law enforcement officials to apprehend individuals who have absconded from justice. By defining absconding and outlining the conditions under which a person can be deemed to have absconded, law enforcement officials are given the necessary tools to track down and bring to justice individuals who have fled or gone into hiding to avoid prosecution. In conclusion, the provisions of section 462.38(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada are essential in ensuring that individuals suspected of committing serious offences cannot evade justice by absconding. It is important for law enforcement officials to understand the conditions under which a person can be deemed to have absconded and to use this provision of the Criminal Code of Canada to bring to justice those who violate the law.

STRATEGY

Section 462.38(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the concept of absconding in connection with a designated offence. It essentially means that a person who has been alleged of committing a designated offence will be deemed as absconded if the reasonable attempts to arrest the person pursuant to the warrant or to serve the summons have been unsuccessful during a period of six months commencing on the day the warrant or summons was issued. There are several strategic considerations that must be taken into account when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada. One of the most important strategic considerations is to ensure that all reasonable attempts to locate and arrest the person have been exhausted before the six-month period expires. This includes utilizing all available resources such as the police force, private investigators, and even data analytics tools to track down the alleged offender. It is also important to document each attempt made to locate the person because this can be used as evidence in court if necessary. Another strategic consideration is to ensure that the warrant issued is valid and that the designated offence has been properly identified. Any errors in the warrant could undermine the prosecution's case and weaken their ability to establish the defendant's guilt. It is also important to ensure that the warrant has been authorized by a lawful authority and that it does not violate any constitutional or legal rights of the defendant. In cases where the alleged offender is not in Canada, it may be necessary to seek extradition. This involves making a request to the foreign jurisdiction to surrender the accused so that they can stand trial in Canada. Extradition can be a complex and time-consuming process, but it may be the only option available in cases where the accused is outside the country. Another strategy to consider is plea bargaining. In some cases, it may be possible to negotiate a plea deal with the accused. This involves offering the accused a reduced sentence or lesser charge in exchange for a guilty plea. Plea bargaining can be beneficial because it saves time and resources, and it can also reduce the risk of a trial resulting in an acquittal. Overall, dealing with section 462.38(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada requires careful planning and execution. By adopting the right strategies, law enforcement officials can increase their chances of successfully arresting the accused and bringing them to justice. This requires collaboration, good communication, and patience.