section 486(1)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Proceedings in open court but exclusion of public may be ordered for reasons related to public morals, maintenance of order, administration of justice, or national security.

SECTION WORDING

486(1) Any proceedings against an accused shall be held in open court, but the presiding judge or justice may order the exclusion of all or any members of the public from the court room for all or part of the proceedings if the judge or justice is of the opinion that such an order is in the interest of public morals, the maintenance of order or the proper administration of justice or is necessary to prevent injury to international relations or national defence or national security.

EXPLANATION

Section 486(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada ensures that all proceedings against an accused individual are held in open court. However, this section also allows the presiding judge or justice to order the exclusion of members of the public from the courtroom for all or part of the proceedings. This can only occur if the judge or justice believes it is in the interest of public morals, the maintenance of order, or the proper administration of justice, or if it is necessary to prevent injury to international relations or national defence or security. This section aims to balance the public's right to access information about court proceedings with the need for privacy and security during certain situations. For example, if a witness's safety or a victim's privacy is at risk, the presiding justice may order the exclusion of the public from the courtroom. Any order made by the judge or justice must be necessary and in line with the principles of justice. Furthermore, this section also recognizes the importance of national security and defence. In certain cases, excluding the public from the courtroom may be necessary to prevent injury to international relations or to ensure the proper administration of justice. This is especially important when it comes to classified information and national security issues. Overall, Section 486(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada seeks to ensure that court proceedings are open and transparent while also respecting the privacy and security concerns of those involved in the proceedings. It is a necessary provision to protect both the public's right to information and the rights and safety of individuals involved in the justice system.

COMMENTARY

Section 486(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada preserves the principle of open court proceedings, but also provides the presiding judge or justice with the discretion to exclude members of the public from a courtroom, based on the opinion that it is necessary for the interest of public morals, maintenance of order, or the proper administration of justice. This power given to the judge or justice tries to balance the interests of the public interest with the interests of individual accused persons. The principle of open court proceedings is an essential part of the criminal justice system. It ensures transparency and accountability in the justice system and allows the public to observe the proceedings. Open court proceedings also serve as a deterrent to potential offenders, by highlighting the consequences of criminal acts and the seriousness with which the justice system takes them. Furthermore, it is important for the judiciary system to be accountable to the public and for the public to understand how the justice system functions. However, there may be certain circumstances that make it necessary for the presiding judge to exclude the public from the court proceedings. For example, in cases involving minors or victims of sexual assault, it may be deemed necessary to exclude the public to protect the identity of the individuals involved. In such cases, the interests of the accused may have to be weighed against the privacy rights of individuals involved in the case. Another scenario that may require the exclusion of the public from court proceedings is where there may be a security risk to the witnesses, jury members or the accused. In cases involving high-profile individuals or political figures or in situations with high levels of tensions, the judge may order the exclusion of the public to ensure the safety of those involved. In light of technological advancements, the rule of Law is finding new ways of operating. Virtual hearings are becoming common, especially in countries where the legal system embraces technology. In such cases, the judge may take similar measures to ensure confidentiality and safety, even to virtual hearings. In conclusion, section 486(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada strikes a fair balance between the principle of open court proceedings and the need to protect the interests of both individuals involved in the case and the public at large. The power to exclude the public from court proceedings is discretionary and should only be invoked if absolutely necessary. The decision to exclude the public should be based on a judicial assessment and any exclusion must be strictly proportionate to the concerns. This section ensures that the judicial system is transparent and accountable, while also taking into consideration the needs of the individuals involved and the broader interests of the public.

STRATEGY

Section 486(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides judges and justices with the discretion to exclude members of the public from the courtroom during criminal proceedings. There are several strategic considerations that legal professionals must keep in mind when dealing with this section of the code, including the rights of the accused, the interests of the public, and the impact on the administration of justice. One important strategic consideration is recognizing that the right to a fair trial is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This means that any order to exclude the public from the courtroom must be carefully weighed against the accused's right to a fair trial. Legal professionals must carefully consider the impact of such an order on the accused's ability to effectively defend themselves, including the potential for witnesses to be influenced by the exclusion of the public. Another strategic consideration is the potential impact on the administration of justice. While section 486(1) allows for the exclusion of the public in certain circumstances, legal professionals must ensure that any such order is not overly broad or arbitrary. For example, excluding the public for an entire trial may be inappropriate if only certain portions of the proceedings require privacy. In addition, any order to exclude the public must not unduly delay or disrupt the proceedings, as this could have negative consequences for both the accused and the judicial system as a whole. Legal professionals must also consider the interests of the public. While section 486(1) allows for the exclusion of the public in certain circumstances, this should not be done without careful consideration of the negative impact on public confidence in the judicial system. Excluding the public from a trial may create the impression that the justice system is secretive or inaccessible, which could have negative consequences for public trust in the courts and legal system. One strategy that legal professionals can employ when dealing with section 486(1) is to carefully assess whether an order to exclude the public is truly necessary. This may involve weighing the potential impact on the accused's right to a fair trial, the interests of the public, and the impact on the administration of justice. Legal professionals may also consider alternative strategies, such as imposing publication bans or restricting access to certain portions of the proceedings, as a less drastic means of protecting privacy or other interests. Another strategy is to be prepared to challenge any orders to exclude the public that are deemed unnecessary or overly broad. Legal professionals can request that the court provide detailed reasons for any order to exclude the public and may challenge such orders on appeal if they are deemed to be unjustified or unwarranted. In conclusion, section 486(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides judges and justices with the discretion to exclude members of the public during criminal proceedings. Legal professionals must carefully balance the interests of the accused, the public, and the administration of justice when dealing with this section of the code. Strategies such as assessing the necessity of any order to exclude the public and challenging unwarranted orders on appeal can help ensure that the rights of all parties are protected.