section 672.44(1)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section allows Review Boards to create rules for practice and procedure with approval from the lieutenant governor in council of the province.

SECTION WORDING

672.44(1) A Review Board may, subject to the approval of the lieutenant governor in council of the province, make rules providing for the practice and procedure before the Review Board.

EXPLANATION

Section 672.44(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada allows Review Boards to create rules regarding the practice and procedure before the Review Board, but only with the approval of the lieutenant governor in council of the relevant province. Review Boards are responsible for overseeing the disposition of individuals who have been found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder, and ensure that these individuals receive the appropriate medical treatment and supervision while protecting public safety. The rules created by the Review Board can include the procedures for conducting hearings, the rights of the accused, the presentation of evidence, and the qualifications of expert witnesses. These rules help to ensure that the Review Board operates effectively, efficiently, and fairly. Additionally, the rules can ensure that the individuals' rights are fully respected during the disposition process. The approval of the lieutenant governor in council is necessary to ensure that the rules created by the Review Board comply with the principles of natural justice and are consistent with the Criminal Code, provincial legislation, and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In this way, the section ensures that the rights of individuals not criminally responsible by reason of mental disorder are protected while also safeguarding the interests of the public. In conclusion, Section 672.44(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the Review Boards with the authority to create rules for their practice and procedure with the approval of the lieutenant governor in council. This section helps to ensure that Review Boards operate effectively, efficiently, and fairly while respecting the rights of the individuals not criminally responsible and upholding public safety.

COMMENTARY

The Criminal Code of Canada is an important legislation that holds the Canadian justice system together. It outlines the various offences that are recognized within the country and lays out the consequences that will result from committing these offences. Additionally, it outlines the procedures that must be followed when dealing with criminal matters, including appeals, trials, and sentencing. Section 672.44(1) is one such provision that outlines the powers and functions of the Review Board. The Review Board is a specialized judicial body, the members of which are appointed by the province. The Board's primary function is to review the continued detention and treatment of individuals designated as Not Criminally Responsible (NCR) due to mental incapacity. One of the critical aspects of the Board's work is the creation of rules that govern the practice and procedure to be followed within the Board. As stated in Section 672.44(1), the Board may create these rules, subject to the approval of the lieutenant governor. These rules are essential for two primary reasons. Firstly, they promote consistency and fairness when dealing with NCR individuals' detention and treatment. By laying out clear guidelines for how the Board should operate, the rules ensure that all parties involved, including the NCR individual and their legal counsel, have a clear understanding of what to expect during each phase of the process. As a result, it reduces confusion and promotes transparency within the system. Secondly, the rules also serve to ensure that the Board operates within the parameters of the law. By clearly outlining what the Board can and cannot do, the law helps to prevent abuses of power. The creation of rules provides a way for individuals to hold the Board accountable for their actions. If the Board steps outside the bounds of its mandate, individuals can use the rules to challenge and appeal its decisions. The rules, therefore, serve as a check on the Board's power. In conclusion, Section 672.44(1) is an essential provision within the Criminal Code of Canada. It reaffirms the importance of the Review Board in the justice system and outlines the necessity for clear guidelines to govern its operations. By ensuring that the Board operates within the legal confines of its authority, the rules promote fairness and consistency and protect the rights of NCR individuals. As such, the provision serves an integral role in ensuring that the Canadian justice system operates in a just and fair manner.

STRATEGY

Section 672.44(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the power of the Review Board to create rules for the practice and procedure before the Board. This section is critical to ensure that the Review Board operates effectively and efficiently in conducting its hearings and making decisions related to individuals who have been found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial due to a mental disorder. There are several strategic considerations when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada, including the following: 1. Ensuring the rules are aligned with the Code: When creating the rules, it is essential to ensure that they are consistent with the Criminal Code and do not conflict with any laws or regulations. The Review Board should consult with legal experts and stakeholders to ensure that the rules are appropriate and just. 2. Balancing due process with public safety: The Review Board must balance the rights of the individual with the need to protect public safety. The rules must provide a fair process for the individuals while also ensuring that public safety concerns are adequately addressed. 3. Providing clear guidelines to parties involved: The rules should provide clear guidelines to all parties involved, including the individual, their legal representative, the Crown, and any other relevant parties. The rules should outline the procedures for presenting evidence, calling witnesses, cross-examination, and making submissions. 4. Addressing different cases: The Review Board must consider how the rules will apply to different cases, including those involving individuals with different types of mental disorders or risks to public safety. The rules should be flexible enough to adapt to different scenarios while still ensuring that due process is upheld. 5. Ensuring consistency: The Review Board should strive for consistency in its decisions. The rules should provide guidance on how similar cases should be treated and what factors should be considered in making decisions. To effectively deal with Section 672.44(1), some strategies that could be employed include: 1. Engaging stakeholders: The Review Board should consult with stakeholders, including legal experts, mental health professionals, individuals with lived experience, and community organizations, to develop the rules. This process will ensure that the rules are relevant, appropriate, and reflective of the concerns of all parties involved. 2. Developing clear guidelines: The Review Board should provide clear guidelines on how the rules will apply in different cases. This will help parties involved to understand the process and ensure that decisions are consistent. 3. Providing training: All parties involved in the Review Board hearings should receive training on the rules and procedures. This will help ensure that everyone understands their roles and responsibilities in the process. 4. Monitoring the effectiveness of the rules: The Review Board should monitor the effectiveness of the rules regularly and make changes where necessary. This process will ensure that the rules remain relevant and effective in ensuring due process and public safety. In conclusion, Section 672.44(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the Review Board with the power to create rules for the practice and procedure before the Board. When dealing with this section of the Code, strategic considerations should include aligning the rules with the Code, balancing due process with public safety, providing clear guidelines, addressing different cases, and ensuring consistency. Strategies that could be employed include engaging stakeholders, developing clear guidelines, providing training, and monitoring the effectiveness of the rules. By following these considerations and employing these strategies, the Review Board can ensure that its decisions are fair, just, and respectful of the rights of individuals while also prioritizing public safety.