section 737(10)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Section 737(10) prohibits the use of fine discharge program for victim surcharge.

SECTION WORDING

737(10) For greater certainty, the program referred to in section 736 for the discharge of a fine may not be used in respect of a victim surcharge.

EXPLANATION

Section 737(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the discharge of a fine through a program established by section 736. Under section 736, a court may order an offender to pay a fine in lieu of imprisonment, and the court has the discretion to establish a payment plan or allow the offender to discharge the fine through a program. However, the victim surcharge is excluded from this program and must be paid in full. The victim surcharge is a financial penalty that is imposed on offenders convicted of a criminal offense, and it is intended to provide financial support to victims of crime. The amount of the victim surcharge is determined by the court and varies depending on the seriousness of the offense and the offender's ability to pay. It is separate from any fines or other penalties imposed on the offender. Section 737(10) clarifies that the program established under section 736 cannot be used to discharge the victim surcharge. This means that offenders must pay the victim surcharge in full and cannot use the payment plan or program to avoid or reduce the payment. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that victims of crime receive the financial support they are entitled to and that offenders are held accountable for their actions. In summary, section 737(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada reinforces the importance of the victim surcharge and ensures that it is not overlooked or minimized in the process of imposing fines and penalties on offenders. It is a reminder that offenders must take responsibility for their actions and that victims of crime deserve to be supported and acknowledged.

COMMENTARY

The Canadian Criminal Justice System has been designed with the purpose of maintaining law and order in society. Its objective is to prevent criminal activities, provide justice to the victims, and punish the wrongdoers. In order to achieve these objectives, fines and victim surcharges often play a critical role. The Criminal Code of Canada, section 737(10), specifies that the program referred to in section 736 for the discharge of a fine may not be used in respect of a victim surcharge. This provision of the Criminal Code has been a matter of debate within the legal circles, as it impacts the role of victim surcharges in the criminal justice system. In simpler terms, Section 737(10) highlights that it is not permissible to discharge victim surcharges by way of a payment plan or to complete community service work. Victim surcharges are financial penalties imposed by courts to offenders in addition to fines, as compensation to victims. These surcharges are meant to fund services and programs that support or assist victims of crime, including counseling, compensation, and support groups. They are essential for ensuring that offenders recognize the harm caused by their actions, to society and individuals, and take responsibility for it. The importance of victim surcharges is reflected in several case laws, which have highlighted their significance. In R v. Trottier (2010) SCC 6, the Supreme Court of Canada emphasized that victim surcharges are meant to promote "fundamental principles of accountability and responsibility for the harm caused." Victim surcharges are thus not intended to be waived, reduced, or deferred. However, the current provision in section 737(10) has been criticized for making it difficult for offenders to pay the victim surcharge, leading to their non-payment. This leads to the delay or denial of services and programs meant for victims of crime. In addition, some argue that it contributes to further marginalization of vulnerable and low-income offenders, who may not have the financial means to pay the surcharge. Despite these criticisms, there are valid reasons for prohibiting the application of discharge plans to victim surcharges. One of the key reasons is the symbolic meaning of the surcharge, as it represents the community's recognition of the harm done to victims. When offenders are required to pay the fine and surcharge, they acknowledge their responsibility and culpability in the criminal act, which is crucial for restoring the confidence of the community in the criminal justice system. Furthermore, allowing offenders to discharge the surcharge undermines the rights of the victim, as they are entitled to receive compensation for the harm done to them. The purpose of the surcharge is to provide funding for victim services, and allowing the discharge plan may compromise the availability of such services. In conclusion, Section 737(10) is a crucial provision of the Canadian Criminal Code that highlights the importance of victim surcharges in the criminal justice system. The prohibition on the use of discharge plans reflects the symbolic, philosophical, and practical aspects of surcharges. While there are concerns about the impact of this provision on low-income or marginalized offenders, one should remember that victim surcharges are essential for upholding the principles of accountability and responsibility in society.

STRATEGY

Section 737(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that restricts the use of the fine option program for offenders who are ordered to pay victim surcharges. The victim surcharge is a fine that is imposed on offenders for the purpose of providing financial assistance to victims of crime. While the fine option program allows offenders to discharge their fines by performing community service instead of paying the fine in cash, this provision makes it clear that it cannot be used in respect of the victim surcharge. This provision raises strategic considerations for lawyers, judges, and other stakeholders in the criminal justice system. One important strategic consideration is the impact of this provision on the ability of offenders to discharge their fines. If an offender has limited financial means, the fine option program may be the only feasible way for them to pay their fine. However, if they are ordered to pay a victim surcharge, they will not be able to use the program to discharge that amount. This could create a situation where offenders are unable to pay their fines and are at risk of being incarcerated for non-payment. This could be harmful both to the offender and to the criminal justice system as a whole. Another strategic consideration is the disproportionate impact of the victim surcharge on low-income offenders. Since the victim surcharge is a fixed amount that is determined by law, it may be difficult for low-income offenders to pay the amount in addition to their fine. This could result in some offenders being punished more severely than others simply because of their economic circumstances. This raises questions about the fairness and effectiveness of the criminal justice system. Given these considerations, there are strategies that could be employed to mitigate the impact of section 737(10) and to improve the fairness and effectiveness of the criminal justice system. One potential strategy is to advocate for changes to the law that would allow offenders to use the fine option program to discharge their victim surcharge. This could be done through lobbying efforts by lawyers, advocacy groups, and other stakeholders. Additionally, there could be attempts made by lawyers to use creative legal arguments that could potentially overcome the barrier posed by section 737(10). Another strategy is to advocate for changes to the way in which victim surcharges are imposed. One possibility could be to create a sliding scale for the victim surcharge that takes into account the offender's ability to pay. This would make the surcharge more equitable and less burdensome for low-income offenders. Additionally, there could be increased efforts to ensure that victims receive the financial assistance that they need, potentially through government-funded programs. In conclusion, section 737(10) of the Criminal Code of Canada has significant strategic implications for lawyers, judges, and other stakeholders in the criminal justice system. While this provision restricts the use of the fine option program for offenders who are ordered to pay victim surcharges, there are strategies that could be employed to mitigate the negative impact of this provision. These strategies could include advocacy efforts to change the law or the way in which victim surcharges are imposed, as well as creative legal arguments that could potentially overcome the barrier posed by section 737(10). Ultimately, the goal should be to create a criminal justice system that is fair, effective, and equitable for all.