section 478(2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section states that the person responsible for publishing a defamatory libel in a newspaper will be charged and punished in the province where they reside or where the newspaper is printed.

SECTION WORDING

478(2) Every proprietor, publisher, editor or other person charged with the publication of a defamatory libel in a newspaper or with conspiracy to publish a defamatory libel in a newspaper shall be dealt with, indicted, tried and punished in the province where he resides or in which the newspaper is printed.

EXPLANATION

Section 478(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada establishes the jurisdictional framework for the prosecution of individuals charged with the publication of a defamatory libel in a newspaper or engaging in a conspiracy to do so. The section specifies that every proprietor, publisher, editor, or any other person charged with such an offense must be indicted, tried, and punished in the province where they reside or where the newspaper is printed. This provision embodies an important principle of criminal law jurisdiction: that an accused person should be tried in the jurisdiction where the offense was committed. In the case of defamatory libel in a newspaper, the jurisdiction is linked to where the newspaper is printed or circulated. By mandating that defendants must be tried where they reside or where the newspaper is printed, the law ensures that they face justice in the appropriate forum and that courts have the authority to enforce their judgments. The provision also recognizes that newspapers have the potential to cause great harm through the publication of defamatory and malicious content against individuals. The inclusion of editors and publishers in the list of those who can be charged highlights the importance of their role in ensuring that newspapers uphold proper journalistic standards and do not publish defamatory material. Overall, Section 478(2) is a vital component of the Criminal Code of Canada, as it ensures that individuals who engage in the publication of defamatory libel in newspapers are held accountable for their actions and brought to justice in the appropriate jurisdiction.

COMMENTARY

Section 478(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the publication of defamatory libel in a newspaper. It specifies that those charged with the publication of a defamatory libel or conspiracy to publish it in a newspaper shall be dealt with, indicted, tried, and punished in the province where they reside or in which the newspaper is printed. This section of the Criminal Code has been subject to much discussion and debate in recent years. Defamatory libel is a serious offence that can cause harm to an individual's reputation and livelihood. It is defined as a false statement that is published, causing harm to a person's reputation. In today's digital age, defamatory libel can be published in many different forms, including on social media, blogs, and websites. This has led to questions about the application of Section 478(2) of the Criminal Code and whether it is still relevant in the modern era. One of the main criticisms of Section 478(2) is that it does not account for the fact that a newspaper can have a national circulation. This means a person charged with publishing a defamatory libel in a newspaper could potentially be tried in any province where the newspaper is available. This can be problematic as it can lead to forum shopping, where plaintiffs look for the most favourable jurisdiction to bring a lawsuit. It also raises questions about the fairness of the trial, as a defendant may be tried in a province where they have no ties or connections. Another criticism of Section 478(2) is that it only applies to traditional newspapers and does not account for the variety of ways that defamatory libel can be published today. With the prevalence of social media and other online platforms, it is much easier for defamatory statements to reach a wider audience. Section 478(2) may be inadequate in dealing with these new forms of publication. There have been calls to reform Section 478(2) to address these concerns. Some have suggested that the law should be updated to include new forms of publication. For example, it could be expanded to cover online publications or social media platforms. Others have suggested that the law should be modified to ensure that defendants are tried in the province where they have the most significant connection. In conclusion, Section 478(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada has been subject to criticism in recent years due to its perceived inadequacy in dealing with modern forms of publication and its potential for unfairness. It is likely that the law will be reformed in the future to address these concerns and ensure that defendants are held accountable for their actions while also protecting their rights.

STRATEGY

Section 478(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the publication of a defamatory libel in a newspaper or conspiracy to publish a defamatory libel in a newspaper. This section presents several strategic considerations that need to be addressed when dealing with such cases. Some strategies that can be employed include understanding the nature of the offense, identifying the relevant parties, developing a defense strategy, and exploring possible alternatives to prosecution. One of the first strategic considerations when dealing with section 478(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is understanding the nature of the offense. A defamatory libel is a written or pictorial representation that injures a person's reputation and exposes them to hatred, contempt, or ridicule. In the case of newspapers, defamatory libel can take the form of false or misleading articles, headlines, or images that damage the reputation of an individual or entity. It is important to have a clear understanding of the elements of the offense, the burden of proof, and the potential consequences of a conviction. Another strategic consideration is identifying the relevant parties involved in the offense. In the case of section 478(2), the relevant parties include the proprietor, publisher, editor, or other person charged with the publication of the defamatory libel. It is important to determine the role of each party, their level of involvement in the offense, and their potential liability under the law. Additionally, identifying the victim of the offense and their damages is critical in building a defense strategy. Developing a defense strategy is another crucial strategic consideration when dealing with section 478(2). Possible defense strategies include truth, fair comment, consent, and absolute privilege. The truth defense is available if the allegedly defamatory statement is true and can be proven. The fair comment defense is available if the statement is an opinion based on true facts and is in the public interest. The consent defense is available if the allegedly defamed party consented to the publication of the statement. Finally, the absolute privilege defense is available if the statement was made in the course of official proceedings, such as parliamentary or judicial proceedings. Developing an appropriate defense strategy depends on the specific circumstances of the case. One of the final strategic considerations is exploring possible alternatives to prosecution. This may include seeking a stay of proceedings, negotiating a plea agreement, or pursuing a diversion program. Seeking a stay of proceedings may be possible if there are procedural or substantive defects in the prosecution's case. Negotiating a plea agreement can result in reduced charges or a lesser sentence. Finally, a diversion program may be available for first-time offenders, which involves completing community service or counseling in exchange for having charges dropped. Exploring alternatives to prosecution can save time and resources for both the defendant and the justice system. In conclusion, section 478(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada presents several strategic considerations when dealing with the publication of a defamatory libel in a newspaper. Strategies that can be employed include understanding the nature of the offense, identifying the relevant parties, developing a defense strategy, and exploring possible alternatives to prosecution. Choosing the appropriate strategy depends on the specific circumstances of the case.