INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
If a party requests a review of a disposition, they are deemed to abandon any appeal against the same disposition.
SECTION WORDING
672.82(2) Where a party requests a review of a disposition under this section, the party is deemed to abandon any appeal against the disposition taken under section 672.72.
EXPLANATION
Section 672.82(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the consequences of requesting a review of a disposition under Section 672.72. This section deals with the process for reviewing a disposition made by a court or review board in relation to a person who has been found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial due to mental illness. If a party requests a review of the disposition under Section 672.72, they are deemed to abandon any appeal against the disposition. Essentially, this means that the party cannot pursue an appeal of the disposition through the normal appeal process, as they are seen to have voluntarily given up that right by requesting a review. This provision is important because it helps to ensure that there is a clear and efficient process for reviewing dispositions made in relation to individuals found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial. If a party were allowed to pursue both an appeal and a review, it could lead to multiple, conflicting decisions that would be difficult to reconcile. Overall, Section 672.82(2) helps to ensure that the review process for dispositions is fair and effective, while also protecting the integrity of the appeals process. By requiring parties to choose between a review or an appeal, it allows for a more streamlined and consistent approach to resolving issues related to dispositions.
COMMENTARY
Section 672.82(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the complex issue of the review of dispositions given to offenders who have been found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial for a criminal offense. In essence, this section states that if a party (either the offender or the Crown) requests a review of a disposition under this section, they are deemed to abandon any previous appeal against the disposition taken under section 672.72. This provision is significant because it provides a mechanism for parties to challenge previous dispositions made in relation to NCR or unfit accused persons, while ensuring that the appeal process is not unnecessarily prolonged. In the Canadian criminal justice system, dispositions for NCR and unfit accused persons are designed to address the unique issues faced by these individuals. Instead of being punished for their actions, they are subject to court-ordered treatment and supervision to address the underlying mental health issues that led to their offending behavior. Dispositions in these cases are made by a court or review board and are based on expert evidence from psychiatrists and other medical professionals. However, these dispositions are not static, and the offender's condition may change over time. This is where the provision for review under section 672.82(2) comes in. If a party requests a review of the disposition, the process involves a reassessment of the accused person's mental state and the effectiveness of the treatment they have been receiving. The court or review board will consider new evidence and determine whether there should be a change in the disposition. This process can be initiated by either party, depending on the circumstances. The provision in section 672.82(2) of the Criminal Code ensures that the review process is efficient and effective. By deeming any previous appeal against the disposition abandoned, parties are encouraged to focus on the review process instead of trying to revisit old issues. This creates a more streamlined and focused system for addressing changes in an accused person's mental health status over time. While this provision is undoubtedly important, it is not without its limitations. Some critics argue that it creates an unfair advantage for the Crown, as they may be in a better position to bring forward new evidence supporting a change in the disposition. Additionally, the provision may discourage accused persons from appealing dispositions initially for fear of losing their right to a review later on. Overall, section 672.82(2) of the Criminal Code strikes a balance between the need for efficient review mechanisms and the protection of the rights of accused persons. It provides an important tool for ensuring that dispositions in NCR and unfit cases remain current and effective, while also respecting the due process rights of all parties involved.
STRATEGY
Section 672.82(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada can have significant implications for parties seeking to review a disposition. In essence, it means that if a party requests a review under this section, they will be deemed to have abandoned any appeal against the original disposition taken under section 672.72. This can limit a party's options and require careful strategic considerations when deciding how to proceed. One important consideration is to weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of pursuing a review versus an appeal. In some cases, a review may be a more expedient and cost-effective way of addressing concerns about a disposition. However, it may also have limitations in terms of the issues that can be raised and the outcomes that can be achieved. An appeal, on the other hand, may offer greater flexibility and the potential for a more significant change in the disposition, but may also be more complex and resource-intensive. Another key consideration is the nature of the disposition in question and the basis for the review. Parties should carefully assess whether there are legitimate grounds to challenge the decision, such as errors of fact or law, procedural irregularities, or new evidence that was not considered at the time of the original disposition. They should also consider whether pursuing a review is likely to achieve their desired outcome, such as a reduction in sentence or a change in the conditions of release. In terms of strategies that could be employed, parties may consider seeking legal guidance from experts in criminal law and review processes. They may also consider engaging in negotiation or mediation with the other party or with the court, in order to explore alternatives to a formal review or appeal. Additionally, parties may wish to conduct a thorough analysis of the relevant precedents and legal frameworks, in order to strengthen their arguments and potential outcomes. Ultimately, the decision to pursue a review under section 672.82(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada requires careful consideration of a range of factors and potential strategies. By engaging in an informed and strategic approach, parties can increase their likelihood of achieving a positive outcome.