section 633

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

The judge can excuse a juror if they have personal hardship or a reasonable cause.

SECTION WORDING

633 The judge may direct a juror who has been called pursuant to subsection 631(3) or (3.1) to stand by for reasons of personal hardship or any other reasonable cause.

EXPLANATION

Section 633 of the Criminal Code of Canada grants discretion to a judge to excuse a juror from duty due to personal hardship or other reasonable cause. Jurors are responsible for ensuring a fair trial by listening to evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense, and rendering a verdict based on the facts. However, jurors may face personal circumstances that make it difficult or impossible for them to effectively perform their duties. The section applies to jurors who have been called pursuant to subsection 631(3) or (3.1) of the Criminal Code. Subsection 631(3) allows a judge to order a sheriff to summon additional jurors if the original jury panel is insufficient to hear a case. Subsection 631(3.1) allows a judge to order the addition of alternate jurors in case a selected juror becomes incapacitated or disqualified during the course of the trial. The section gives judges the discretion to excuse jurors in cases where personal hardship makes it unreasonable or unfair for a person to serve on a jury at a particular time. Examples of personal hardship that can be taken into consideration include health issues, family emergencies, and work responsibilities that cannot be postponed. Other reasonable cause cited by a juror could include extreme weather conditions that make it difficult to attend court, the nature of the case being heard, or any other circumstances that could affect the juror's ability to perform their duty. Overall, Section 633 provides judges with the authority to ensure that those called for jury service are capable and ready to perform their crucial role in the court system. This provision also serves to protect the rights of jurors by considering their individual circumstances and avoiding undue burden or hardship.

COMMENTARY

Section 633 of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that confers power to judges in selecting a jury in a criminal trial. It enables judges to excuse a prospective juror from service if there is a reasonable cause for doing so, such as personal hardship, illness, or any other valid reason. This provision serves the dual purpose of ensuring fair and impartial participation of jurors in the trial and preventing undue hardship or unfairness to individuals who are summoned for jury duty. The right to a fair trial is one of the fundamental principles of Canada's legal system. A fair trial ensures that justice is served, and it is an essential component of a democratic society. One of the most critical factors that contribute to a fair trial is the selection of an impartial jury. An impartial jury is one that is free from bias, prejudice, or any preconceived notion about the accused. Such a jury is essential in ensuring that the accused receives a fair, unbiased, and objective hearing during the trial. Section 633 recognizes this principle and empowers judges to excuse prospective jurors if they have a reasonable cause for doing so that may affect their impartiality and fairness in the trial. Moreover, section 633 recognizes the importance of accommodating the needs of jurors who may experience personal hardship or difficulties in performing their duty. For instance, if a prospective juror has a medical condition that precludes them from serving, this provision empowers the judge to excuse them without any unnecessary hardship. It is also possible for a juror to be excused for any other reasonable cause that may affect their ability to serve on a jury. Section 633 embodies a progressive, rights-based approach to the selection of jurors, as it recognizes the importance of accommodating the needs of prospective jurors who may face hardship or difficulties. This provision ensures that the burden of jury service is not unduly imposed on any particular individuals or groups who may have difficulty fulfilling their obligations. While the right to a fair trial is of utmost importance, it should be balanced against the need to minimize undue hardship or injustice to those individuals summoned for jury duty. In conclusion, Section 633 of the Criminal Code of Canada is an essential provision that recognizes the importance of selecting an impartial and fair jury in criminal trials. It empowers judges to excuse prospective jurors who may have a reasonable cause for not serving or who may experience personal hardship or difficulties. This provision ensures that the rights and dignity of all parties, including jurors, are respected and protected in the criminal justice system.

STRATEGY

Section 633 of the Criminal Code of Canada provides for the discretionary power of judges to excuse jurors from serving on a trial for personal hardship or any other reasonable cause. This section is an important tool for ensuring that the jury selection process is fair and impartial, and that jurors are able to perform their duties without undue burden or hardship. One strategic consideration when dealing with section 633 is to carefully assess the reasons given by jurors for requesting to be excused. Jurors may have legitimate personal hardship or other valid reasons that would make it difficult or impossible for them to serve on a trial. However, jurors may also attempt to use section 633 to avoid serving on a trial for less legitimate reasons, such as bias or prejudice against the accused or the nature of the charges. To address this issue, lawyers and judges may need to engage in careful questioning and scrutiny when jurors request to be excused under section 633. Lawyers may wish to probe more deeply into the nature of the hardship or other reason given by the juror, in order to determine whether it is based on actual necessity or whether there may be other factors at play. Judges may also need to assess whether the claimed reason for excusal would result in a finding of actual hardship or whether a less stringent standard should be applied. Another strategic consideration when dealing with section 633 is to consider the impact of excusing a juror on the overall fairness and impartiality of the trial. While it may be necessary to excuse a juror in some cases, such as where the juror is facing a serious personal hardship, it is important to ensure that doing so will not unduly bias the remaining jurors or limit the scope of their deliberations. To address this issue, lawyers and judges may need to consider the broader implications of excusing a juror, such as whether the remaining jurors will still be able to provide a diverse range of perspectives and opinions on the case, and whether the trial will still be fair and impartial even with one fewer juror. Lawyers may also need to consider whether this section can be strategically used to remove a particular juror who might not provide a fair trial. In terms of strategies that could be employed when dealing with section 633, lawyers may wish to use voir dire questioning and other techniques to carefully screen jurors before they are selected to serve on a trial. This may help to identify potential sources of bias or prejudice that could lead to requests for excusal under section 633. Additionally, lawyers may wish to provide evidence or information to the judge that supports their case for or against excusing a juror under section 633. This could include medical reports or other documentation of a juror's personal hardship, or information about the nature of the charges or the potential impact of excusing a juror on the fairness of the trial. In conclusion, section 633 of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important tool for judges to use in ensuring that jurors are able to perform their duties without undue hardship or burden. However, lawyers and judges must use careful judgement and scrutiny when assessing requests for excusal under this section, in order to ensure that the jury selection process is fair and impartial, and that the trial is conducted in a manner that upholds the principles of justice.