Criminal Code of Canada - section 485(1) - Procedural irregularities

section 485(1)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Jurisdiction over an offence is not lost due to failure of a court or non-compliance with provisions on adjournments or remands.

SECTION WORDING

485(1) Jurisdiction over an offence is not lost by reason of the failure of any court, judge, provincial court judge or justice to act in the exercise of that jurisdiction at any particular time, or by reason of a failure to comply with any of the provisions of this Act respecting adjournments or remands.

EXPLANATION

Section 485(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision that supports the seamless administration of justice in Canada. The section stipulates that the failure of any court, judge, provincial court judge, or justice to act at any point in the exercise of their jurisdiction, or a failure to comply with any of the provisions of the Criminal Code related to adjournments or remands does not result in the loss of jurisdiction over an offense. This provision is essential because it ensures that the integrity of the criminal justice system in Canada is maintained. The ongoing jurisdiction over an offense means that prosecution and punishment of an offender can take place, even if legal errors occur during the legal process. The provision protects the system from technicalities that may arise, such as mistakes made by judges, prosecutors, or other legal practitioners that could result in a violation of justice. In other words, an accused person cannot evade liability simply because of an error made by the court or prosecutors. Furthermore, Section 485(1) ensures that cases do not drag on indefinitely due to adjournments or remands. The provision safeguards that the prosecution process must continue swiftly, regarding the seriousness of the offense. This measure is to protect the rights of the accused and to ensure a timely resolution of cases. Overall, Section 485(1) guarantees that the legal process in Canada remains fair, just, and swift. It reinforces the importance of holding offenders accountable for their actions, while also ensuring that justice is served without undue delays or technicalities.

COMMENTARY

Section 485(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that speaks volumes to the spirit of the Canadian criminal justice system. It highlights the inherent importance of ensuring that an offender is not allowed to go unpunished by exploiting an administrative lapse in jurisdictional oversight. This provision provides that jurisdiction over an offence will not be lost even if a court or justice fails to act in the exercise of that jurisdiction at any time or if there is a failure to comply with any of the statutory provisions surrounding adjournments or remands. Indeed, this is an essential feature of the criminal justice system, as it ensures that justice is neither compromised nor forgotten just because of administrative lapses. In Canada, there is a fundamental commitment to the principles of fairness, transparency, consistency, and accountability in matters dealing with criminal justice. These principles are enshrined in several legal instruments, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Criminal Code of Canada, which provides detailed guidelines for the administration of justice within the criminal law context. Section 485(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada seeks to ensure that the administration of justice in Canada is not thwarted by the error of an individual or group. The provision ensures that the court retains jurisdiction over an offence, despite any administrative lapses, which would otherwise allow an accused person to avoid the full weight of the law. This provision reinforces the idea that Canadian justice is not just about norms, standards, and formal legal structures but it is also about the spirit of justice. It suggests that justice must be done, irrespective of the condition of the machinery of administration, and that no one should go unpunished simply because an administrative step was not taken. In essence, Section 485(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that is in line with the Canadian legal tradition of ensuring that the ends of justice are not frustrated through technicalities or individual errors. The criminal justice system should not be seen as just a body of laws, but it must be seen as a living, evolving organism that promotes fairness, equity, and justice for all, irrespective of their social stature or financial means. Finally, it should be noted that this provision is a reflection of the Canadian legal ethos that seeks to promote accountability in the administration of justice. It affirms the idea that those who are responsible for the administration of justice must be held to the highest standards of accountability, and that their failure to properly discharge their duties does not automatically let an offender off the hook.

STRATEGY

Section 485(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada constitutes an important safeguard for individuals who face criminal charges. This provision ensures that jurisdiction over an offence is not lost simply because a judge or court fails to act or fails to comply with procedural requirements. The purpose of this section is to prevent a defendant from being prejudiced by the actions (or inaction) of the court system. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, there are several strategic considerations that a defense lawyer might take into account. One key strategy is to monitor the court's compliance with the procedural requirements of the Criminal Code. If a court fails to comply with the requirements for adjournments or remands, for example, a defense lawyer may seek to have the charges dismissed under section 485(1). Alternatively, a defense lawyer may choose to use section 485(1) as a tactical tool to delay the proceedings and gain more time to build their case. Since the jurisdiction remains intact regardless of the court's actions, a defense lawyer may use this provision to stall the proceedings until they have had more time to investigate or collect evidence. By doing so, they may be able to weaken the prosecution's case and increase the chances of a favorable outcome. Another strategy that a defense lawyer might consider is to use section 485(1) in conjunction with other provisions of the Criminal Code, such as the right to a speedy trial under section 11(b). By combining these provisions, a defense lawyer may be able to argue that the proceedings are unjustly delayed and seek to have the charges dismissed altogether. However, it is important to note that it may not always be strategic to have the charges dismissed, as some defendants may prefer to have their day in court. In addition to the above strategies, it is crucial for a defense lawyer to remain vigilant in upholding their client's rights. By keeping a close eye on the proceedings and being aware of the possible consequences of a court's failure to act, defense lawyers can ensure that their clients are not unfairly prejudiced in the criminal justice system. Overall, section 485(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada presents a number of strategic considerations for defense lawyers. By using this provision effectively, defense lawyers may be able to delay proceedings, weaken the prosecution's case, or even have charges dismissed altogether. However, it is important to use these strategies judiciously and in the best interest of their clients.