INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section allows a surety to request to be relieved of their obligation and for the person they are bound to appear for to be committed to prison.
SECTION WORDING
766(1) A surety for a person who is bound by recognizance to appear may, by an application in writing to a court, justice or provincial court judge, apply to be relieved of his obligation under the recognizance, and the court, justice or provincial court judge shall thereupon issue an order in writing for committal of that person to the prison nearest to the place where he was, under the recognizance, bound to appear.
EXPLANATION
Section 766(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the concept of suretyship in the criminal justice system. A surety is someone who offers to take responsibility for a defendant who has been released on bail or recognizance pending trial. The surety agrees to ensure that the defendant appears in court on the required dates and complies with any other conditions set by the court. If the defendant fails to meet their obligations while on bail or recognizance, the surety may apply to be relieved of their obligation. This could happen if, for example, the defendant fails to appear in court or violates the conditions of their release. The surety would then file an application in writing to the court, justice, or provincial court judge to be relieved of their obligation. If the application is successful, the court, justice, or provincial court judge will issue an order for the defendant to be committed to the nearest prison. This means that the defendant will be arrested and sent back to jail until their trial. The purpose of this section is to hold defendants accountable for their actions and to ensure that they appear in court when required. Overall, section 766(1) serves as a reminder that when a defendant is released on bail or recognizance pending trial, there is an expectation that they will comply with the conditions of their release. If they fail to do so, their surety may face consequences, and the defendant may find themselves back in custody until their trial date.
COMMENTARY
Section 766(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the role of a surety in ensuring that a person who is bound by recognizance appears in court when required. A recognizance is a promise made by an accused person to appear in court at a later date, and may be accompanied by other conditions, such as a requirement to remain within a certain geographic area or to refrain from contacting certain individuals. A surety is an individual who agrees to take responsibility for ensuring that the accused person complies with the conditions of their recognizance. This can include providing financial security to the court, monitoring the accused person's activities, and reporting any violations of the recognizance to the authorities. If a surety believes that they can no longer fulfill their obligations under the recognizance, they may apply to a court or justice to be relieved of their responsibility. This may be due to various reasons, such as concerns for their safety or the safety of others, or an inability to continue monitoring the accused person's activities. Once the surety's application is accepted, the court or justice will issue an order for the committal of the accused person to the nearest prison. This serves as a way to ensure that the accused person appears in court at the appointed time. Should the accused person fail to appear, they may be subject to further penalties, including the revocation of their bail and/or additional criminal charges. Section 766(1) plays an important role in ensuring that the criminal justice system functions effectively. By requiring accused persons to provide a recognizance, and by requiring sureties to monitor their activities, the system can ensure that individuals appear in court as required. This can help to prevent unnecessary delays in the legal process, and can also serve as a deterrent against further criminal activity. At the same time, however, the use of recognizances and sureties can also be problematic. For example, some individuals may not have the financial resources to provide a recognizance or find a suitable surety, which can result in their continued detention prior to trial. Additionally, the involvement of sureties can sometimes lead to conflicts of interest, especially if the accused person and the surety have a pre-existing relationship. Overall, while Section 766(1) serves a valuable function in the criminal justice system, it is important to consider the potential limitations and drawbacks associated with the use of recognizances and sureties. Efforts should be made to ensure that the system is fair and accessible to all individuals, while also providing appropriate safeguards to protect the public from potential harm.
STRATEGY
Section 766(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada allows for a surety to be relieved of their obligation under a recognizance. This section considers several strategic considerations and tactics that can be employed when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code. Firstly, it is essential to note that being a surety is a serious responsibility. A surety must ensure that the person for whom they stand surety complies with the terms of the recognizance, appears in court when required, and does not engage in further criminal activity. Therefore, it is crucial that the surety thoroughly understands the responsibilities they are undertaking when agreeing to be a surety. One strategic consideration when dealing with this section is to carefully review the terms of the recognizance. It is important to ensure that the person bound by the recognizance appears in court when required, complies with any conditions of the recognizance, and does not engage in further criminal activity. The surety should also be aware of any possible repercussions if the person for whom they stand surety breaches the recognizance. Another strategic consideration is to communicate with the person for whom the surety is standing surety. The surety must communicate with the accused and make sure they understand the terms of the recognizance. The surety should also ensure that the accused understands the consequences of breaching the recognizance. By ensuring that they understand the terms and conditions, the chances of the accused breaching the terms of the recognizance are reduced. In case the accused breaches the terms of the recognizance, one tactic that could be employed by the surety is to monitor the accused's whereabouts and activities. The surety should keep track of the accused's movements, whereabouts and activities, and report any violation of the terms of the recognizance to the authorities immediately. The surety can also arrange for a bail enforcement agent to assist in monitoring the accused. Another strategy that could be employed by the surety is to request for a variation of the recognizance terms. If the accused finds it difficult to comply with some of the conditions of the recognizance, the surety could request the court for a variation that will make it easier for the accused to meet the conditions. The surety must ensure that any variation proposed does not compromise public safety and security. The surety can also utilize the services of a criminal defence lawyer to help them navigate the legal process. The lawyer can provide legal advice and assistance on the relevant laws and procedures and ensure that the rights of the accused and the surety are protected. In conclusion, standing surety is a serious commitment that requires careful consideration and planning. A strategic approach to dealing with section 766(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada involves reviewing and understanding the terms of the recognizance, communicating with the accused, monitoring their whereabouts and activities, requesting for variation of the terms, and utilizing the services of a criminal defence lawyer. By employing these strategies, the surety can effectively fulfill their obligations and ensure that the accused complies with the terms of the recognizance.