INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section specifies the format of challenges in criminal proceedings.
SECTION WORDING
639(2) A challenge may be in Form 41.
EXPLANATION
Section 639(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the procedure for issuing a challenge against a potential juror during a criminal trial. A challenge is a request to remove a potential juror from the pool of potential jurors due to a perceived bias or other perceived disqualification. The section states that a challenge must be submitted in a specific format, which is outlined in Form 41. This form provides a standardized way for lawyers to issue challenges, ensuring that each challenge is clear and consistent. The use of Form 41 also helps to prevent any confusion or misunderstandings during the challenge process. Additionally, this section also sets a limit on the number of words that can be used in the challenge submission - between 100 and 300 words. This requirement ensures that challenges are concise and focused on the specific reasons for the challenge, rather than being overly verbose or confusing. Overall, section 639(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada helps to ensure that challenges are handled in a fair and consistent manner, and that the process is clear and understandable for all parties involved in a criminal trial.
COMMENTARY
Section 639(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the process for challenging a potential juror during a criminal trial. It states that the challenge must be made in Form 41, which is a standard form used in courts across the country. The purpose of a challenge is to ensure that the jury is impartial and unbiased. Both the prosecution and defense have the right to challenge potential jurors who they believe may not be able to impartially assess the evidence presented in a trial. Reasons for challenging a potential juror may include a personal connection to the accused, a prior conviction for a similar crime, or a perceived bias or prejudice. Form 41 is a formal document that must be filed with the court. It includes information about the juror being challenged, such as their name, occupation, and any other relevant details. The person making the challenge must also provide a reason for the challenge in writing. Once the challenge is made, the judge will assess whether or not it is valid. If the judge agrees that the potential juror is not impartial or unbiased, they will be excused from the jury pool. The process is repeated until a jury is selected that is deemed fair and impartial. Section 639(2) is an important part of the Criminal Code of Canada because it helps to ensure that the legal system is fair and just. By allowing both the prosecution and defense to challenge potential jurors, it helps to prevent any biases or prejudices that could influence a jury's decision. By requiring a formal process for making challenges, it ensures that challenges are based on valid reasons rather than personal feelings or emotions. In conclusion, Section 639(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important part of the legal system. It helps to ensure that juries are fair and impartial, which is essential for maintaining public trust in the justice system. By providing a codified process for making challenges, it helps to prevent any potential biases or prejudices from influencing the jury's decision.
STRATEGY
Section 639(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada governs the procedure for the challenge of prospective jurors in criminal trials. It allows for a party to challenge a prospective juror without giving any reason, but must be done in accordance with Form 41. The exercise of peremptory challenges can have a significant impact on the composition of the jury and, therefore, on the outcome of the trial. As such, there are several strategic considerations when dealing with this provision of the Criminal Code. One key strategic consideration is the use of peremptory challenges to remove potentially unfavorable jurors. This may be particularly important in cases where there is a risk of bias or prejudice on the part of the jury. For example, if the accused is a member of a minority group, it may be strategic to use peremptory challenges to remove prospective jurors who are perceived to hold biases or prejudices against the accused on the basis of their race, ethnicity, or religion. Another strategic consideration is the number of peremptory challenges available to each party. The Criminal Code provides for a different number of challenges depending on the offence and the jurisdiction. For example, for a trial for murder in Ontario, each party is entitled to 20 peremptory challenges, while in Quebec, each party is entitled to 12 challenges. The number of challenges available can significantly impact the party's ability to shape the composition of the jury. Parties should, therefore, carefully consider the number of challenges available to them and how they can best be used to their advantage. In addition to considering the available number of challenges, parties may also consider the order in which they exercise their challenges. This can be strategically important, as the removal of certain jurors may affect the remaining pool of prospective jurors. For example, removing a juror who is perceived to be sympathetic to the accused may result in the selection of a juror who is more likely to be impartial. Further, parties may consider the use of "trading" challenges. Trading challenges refers to the negotiation of peremptory challenges between the parties, which can allow each party to remove jurors that may be unfavorable to them. Importantly, this strategy requires the cooperation of the opposing party, and may not always be possible or desirable. Lastly, parties may consider challenging the composition of the jury pool itself. This can involve challenging the method of selection, the representativeness of the pool, or other factors that may affect the impartiality of the selection process. This strategy may be particularly important in cases where the accused is a member of a minority group or where there are concerns about bias in the community. In conclusion, the exercise of peremptory challenges under Section 639(2) of the Criminal Code can have a significant impact on the outcome of a trial. As such, parties must carefully consider their use of peremptory challenges and adopt a strategic approach that takes into account key factors such as the available number of challenges, the composition of the jury pool, and the order of challenges. By using these strategies, parties can increase their chances of achieving a favorable outcome for their case.