Criminal Code of Canada - section 585 - Sufficiency of count charging perjury, etc.

section 585

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section states that a charge of perjury, making false statements, fabricating evidence, or procuring an offense is not insufficient solely for the reason of not stating specific details.

SECTION WORDING

585 No count that charges (a) perjury, (b) the making of a false oath or a false statement, (c) fabricating evidence, or (d) procuring the commission of an offence mentioned in paragraph (a), (b) or (c), is insufficient by reason only that it does not state the nature of the authority of the tribunal before which the oath or statement was taken or made, or the subject of the inquiry, or the words used or the evidence fabricated, or that it does not expressly negative the truth of the words used.

EXPLANATION

Section 585 of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the sufficiency of charges in relation to certain offences, specifically perjury, making a false oath or statement, fabricating evidence, and procuring the commission of any of the aforementioned offences. The section states that a count charging any of these offences is not insufficient merely because it does not specify the nature of the tribunal, the subject of the inquiry, the exact words used or the evidence fabricated, or expressly negative the truth of the words used. The purpose of this section is to ensure that charges related to these offences are not dismissed on procedural technicalities. These offences are serious in nature, as they involve deceit, dishonesty, and an attempt to obstruct justice. Therefore, it is important to ensure that proper charges are laid and that those responsible for committing these offences are held accountable. At the same time, the section recognizes that it may not always be possible or necessary to include specific details in the charges, especially if they do not affect the substance of the offence. In summary, section 585 of the Criminal Code of Canada is a procedural provision that helps to ensure that charges related to certain offences are not dismissed on the basis of technicalities, while also recognizing that specific details may not always be necessary in charging documents.

COMMENTARY

Section 585 of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that applies to the charging of perjury, false oaths or statements, fabricating evidence, or procuring the commission of any of those offences. It states that a count that charges these offences is not insufficient even if it does not provide certain details that might be considered necessary to prove the offence. Specifically, it says that the count is not insufficient if it does not state the nature of the tribunal's authority, the subject of the inquiry, the words used in the false statement or fabricated evidence, or explicitly deny the truth of those words. This provision is important because it recognizes that charging someone with perjury, making a false statement or oath, fabricating evidence, or procuring someone else to commit any of those offences is a serious matter that requires a high degree of evidentiary proof. However, it also recognizes that the failure to provide a certain level of detail should not be a bar to a conviction if the other elements of the offence can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. In practice, this provision means that a prosecutor may charge someone with perjury or making a false statement without providing a detailed description of the oath or statement that was made. Similarly, if someone is charged with fabricating evidence, the count may not need to describe the nature of the evidence or the words that were used to create it. In some cases, this provision may make it easier for a prosecutor to obtain a conviction for perjury, false statements, or other offences related to dishonesty. For example, if a witness is shown to have lied during an inquiry or trial, the prosecutor may be able to charge them with perjury even if they did not explicitly state that they were under oath at the time. Similarly, if someone is accused of fabricating evidence, the prosecutor may still be able to charge them even if they did not specify exactly what the evidence was. On the other hand, this provision may also present certain challenges for the accused. Without a detailed account of the allegedly false statement or fabricated evidence, it may be difficult for the defence to mount an effective argument in their favour. This could potentially undermine the presumption of innocence and make it more difficult for the accused to defend themselves against the charges. Overall, Section 585 of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that recognizes the serious nature of offences related to dishonesty while also allowing for flexibility in how these offences are charged and prosecuted. While it may present certain challenges for the defence, it ultimately serves to balance the needs of justice with the rights of the accused.

STRATEGY

When dealing with Section 585 of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are a number of strategic considerations that should be taken into account. These considerations include the nature of the offence being prosecuted, the specific circumstances of the case, and the goals of the prosecution. One important strategic consideration is the nature of the offence being prosecuted. Perjury, making a false oath or statement, fabricating evidence, and procuring the commission of an offence through perjury or false statements are all serious offences, and there may be significant consequences for a conviction. As such, it is important to carefully consider the evidence that will be presented and the arguments that will be made in court in order to ensure that the charges are proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Another important strategic consideration is the specific circumstances of the case. This may include factors such as the identity of the accused, the evidence that is available, and the nature of the tribunal before which the offence was committed. For example, if the tribunal in question is a highly respected court or tribunal, it may be more difficult to argue that the accused was motivated by a desire to undermine the integrity of the legal system. The goals of the prosecution are also an important strategic consideration. In some cases, the prosecution may seek to use Section 585 as a means of securing a conviction in a more straightforward manner than would be possible under other sections of the Criminal Code. For example, if the prosecution is unable to prove that an accused committed perjury, they may instead charge them with making a false statement under Section 585 in order to secure a conviction on a related offence. In light of these considerations, there are a number of strategic approaches that could be employed when dealing with Section 585 of the Criminal Code. One approach might be to focus on demonstrating that the accused acted with intent to deceive or mislead, and that their actions had a significant impact on the tribunal in question. This may involve presenting evidence of the accused's state of mind, as well as evidence of the consequences of their actions. Another potential strategy might be to seek to have the charges under Section 585 stayed or dismissed on the basis that they are overly broad or vague. This could involve arguing that the section fails to provide adequate guidance as to the specific nature of the offence that is being charged, or that it is not clear what standard of proof is required to establish guilt. Overall, the key to success when dealing with Section 585 of the Criminal Code is to carefully consider the specific circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence being prosecuted, and the goals of the prosecution, and to develop a strategic approach that is tailored to those factors. By doing so, it may be possible to achieve a favourable outcome for the accused or the prosecution in a given case.