Criminal Code of Canada - section 634(4) - Where there are joint trials

section 634(4)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section states that when multiple accused are to be tried together, each accused has the same number of peremptory challenges as they would if tried alone and the prosecutor has the total number of challenges available to all accused.

SECTION WORDING

634(4) Where two or more accused are to be tried together, (a) each accused is entitled to the number of peremptory challenges to which the accused would be entitled if tried alone; and (b) the prosecutor is entitled to the total number of peremptory challenges available to all the accused.

EXPLANATION

Section 634(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the rights of accused persons and prosecutors in the context of a joint trial. A joint trial occurs when two or more accused individuals are tried together for the same crime(s). In such cases, each accused is entitled to the same number of peremptory challenges as they would have if they were being tried alone. Peremptory challenges allow a party to exclude someone from the jury without having to provide a reason. The wording of the section specifies that each accused must have an equal number of challenges, regardless of their roles in the crime or their differing circumstances. This is meant to ensure fairness in the proceedings and that each accused is given the chance to have a jury that they feel will be impartial and unbiased in their verdict. It also implies that the rights of the accused are to be respected, regardless of the fact that they are being tried together. Furthermore, the prosecutor is entitled to the total number of peremptory challenges that all the accused would have had if they were being tried alone. This allows them to have a certain amount of control over the jury selection process while also maintaining fairness. The prosecutor's right to challenges is limited to peremptory challenges, which means they cannot challenge a potential juror on the basis of discriminatory factors such as race or religion. Overall, Section 634(4) ensures that all parties involved in a joint trial are given equal and fair opportunities to challenge potential jurors, while also maintaining some level of control over the process. It is an important aspect of the Canadian criminal justice system that upholds the principles of fairness and impartiality in the administration of justice.

COMMENTARY

Section 634(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada governs the peremptory challenges available to accused persons and the prosecutor in a joint trial situation. Peremptory challenges allow parties in a trial to exclude potential jurors without giving a reason for doing so. Section 634(4) ensures that each accused person is entitled to the same number of peremptory challenges that they would have if they were being tried alone, while the prosecutor is entitled to the total number of peremptory challenges available to all the accused. The purpose of peremptory challenges is to promote impartiality and fairness in jury selection by allowing parties to exclude jurors who they believe may be biased or unsuitable for reasons that may not be revealed during jury selection. Parties may use their peremptory challenges to exclude jurors based on personal characteristics, such as occupation, race, or gender. However, the use of peremptory challenges has been criticized for allowing for the exclusion of jurors on arbitrary or discriminatory grounds. The use of peremptory challenges in a joint trial situation raises unique issues. Joint trials can involve multiple accused persons who are charged with the same or similar offences and who may have different defences or levels of culpability. This can create a complex dynamic where the use of peremptory challenges by one accused may impact the interests of the other accused. Section 634(4)(a) ensures that each accused person in a joint trial is entitled to the same number of peremptory challenges as they would have if they were being tried alone. This recognizes that each accused person has the right to a fair trial and to have a say in the selection of the jury that will determine their guilt or innocence. However, it also means that the total number of peremptory challenges available to the accused in a joint trial may be higher than if each accused was being tried alone. Section 634(4)(b) ensures that the prosecutor in a joint trial is entitled to the total number of peremptory challenges available to all the accused. This recognizes that the prosecutor has the burden of proving the guilt of each accused person and should therefore have a say in the selection of the jury that will hear the case. However, this also means that the prosecutor may have a higher number of peremptory challenges available to them in a joint trial than if each accused was being tried alone. The use of peremptory challenges in a joint trial situation can have an impact on the fairness of the trial and the interests of each accused person. While Section 634(4) attempts to address these issues by ensuring that each accused is entitled to the same number of peremptory challenges and the prosecutor is entitled to the total number available, it does not eliminate the potential for complex interactions between the accused and the prosecutor in the selection of the jury. In conclusion, Section 634(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that attempts to ensure the fair use of peremptory challenges in joint trial situations. While it recognizes the rights of each accused person and the interests of the prosecutor, it does not eliminate the potential for complex interactions between parties in the selection of the jury. It is important for courts to be vigilant in ensuring that the use of peremptory challenges in joint trials does not compromise the fairness of the trial or the interests of any party involved.

STRATEGY

Section 634(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision in the criminal justice system. This provision governs the number of peremptory challenges available to each accused and to the prosecutor in instances where two or more accused are being tried together. A peremptory challenge is a challenge to a prospective juror without assigning any reason. This provision is significant in trial proceedings because it gives the accused a right to a fair trial by an impartial jury. One strategic consideration is the number of peremptory challenges available to each accused. Each accused is entitled to the number of peremptory challenges that they would be entitled to if tried alone. Therefore, in a joint trial, the combined number of challenges for all accused will be higher than in an individual trial. This means that the prosecutor may exercise peremptory challenges against jurors that, if the accused was alone, they would have kept on the jury. As such, it is crucial for the accused's counsel to carefully consider which jurors to challenge and not to waste peremptory challenges on weak jurors, as they may need them later on. Another strategic consideration is the prosecutor's right to the total number of peremptory challenges available to all the accused. This means that the prosecutor can use the full number of peremptory challenges against each of the accused, who would not have expended them otherwise if they had been tried alone. This provision gives the prosecutor significant power in joint trials, as they can eliminate jurors that favour the accused. Therefore, the accused's counsel must be vigilant in ensuring that the prosecutor does not use their challenges to eliminate jurors that would be favourable to their client. One strategy that can be employed by the accused's counsel is to try to sever the cases and have their client tried separately. This would enable them to benefit from the full number of peremptory challenges available to them and not be subjected to the full number of challenges against them. Furthermore, if a joint trial would result in undue prejudice to one of the accused, the court could order a severance. This strategy would enable the accused's counsel to tailor the defence to their client's unique circumstances and potentially obtain a more favourable outcome. Another strategy that can be employed by the accused's counsel is to conduct thorough behavioural analysis of potential jurors. This analysis looks at potential jurors' personality traits and the impact that they may have on the verdict. By identifying jurors that are likely favourable to the accused, the accused's counsel can strategically use peremptory challenges to keep them on the jury. In contrast, they can use their challenges against jurors that may be more likely to convict. In conclusion, section 634(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision in the criminal justice system that governs the number of peremptory challenges available to the accused and the prosecutor in joint trials. Strategic considerations when dealing with this section include the number of peremptory challenges available, the prosecutor's right to the full number of challenges, and the possibility of seeking severance. Strategies that can be employed include thorough behavioural analysis of potential jurors and carefully selecting which jurors to challenge.