INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section of the Criminal Code of Canada requires notification to the offender before seeking the application of subsection (1).
SECTION WORDING
83.27 (2) Subsection (1) does not apply unless the prosecutor satisfies the court that the offender, before making a plea, was notified that the application of that subsection would be sought.
EXPLANATION
Section 83.27(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a legal provision that outlines a critical requirement for the application of subsection (1). Subsection (1) of this section deals with the consequences of an accused person pleading guilty to a terrorism offence. Specifically, it mandates the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence of five years' imprisonment for persons convicted of terrorism offences. However, subsection (2) provides an exception to the mandatory minimum sentence requirement of subsection (1). This exception applies only if the prosecutor can demonstrate to the court that the offender was notified of the subsection's application before they made a plea in court. This requirement aims to ensure that offenders are aware of the potential consequences of their plea to terrorism offences before they enter the guilty plea. When the prosecutor has successfully demonstrated to the court that the offender has been notified of the application of subsection (1), the mandatory minimum sentence will apply. Thus, the court may order the imposition of a sentence of not less than five years, regardless of any mitigating factors or circumstances of the case. The Criminal Code of Canada's provisions regarding terrorism are taken very seriously, and any violation of the provisions can result in significant penalties. Therefore, Section 83.27(2) ensures that offenders receive adequate notice of the full consequences of their guilty plea before the court imposes any sentence. This notice allows offenders to make a more informed decision and helps to maintain the integrity and fairness of the judicial process.
COMMENTARY
Section 83.27(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that has been designed to ensure that individuals charged with terrorism offenses are aware of the potential consequences of their plea before deciding to enter one. This section makes it clear that the prosecutor seeking the application of subsection (1) must first satisfy the court that the accused was informed of the possibility of the application of subsection (1) before making a plea. Subsection (1) of Section 83.27 deals with the imposition of specific penal measures aimed at protecting the public against individuals who have been convicted of terrorism offenses. The provisions of subsection (1) allow for the imposition of certain measures, such as the imposition of strict conditions, restrictions on travel, and even electronic monitoring, on individuals convicted of terrorism-related offences. These measures are imposed in the interest of public safety and are aimed at preventing any possible recurrence of terrorist activity. However, given the severity of this provision and its potential effects on individual liberties, it is essential that individuals charged with terrorist offences are fully aware of the consequences of their plea before accepting it. They must explicitly be informed that the prosecution may seek the application of subsection (1) of Section 83.27 of the Criminal Code. The requirement of notification under Section 83.27(2) is not an arduous one, as it involves only informing the accused of the possibility of applying Section 83.27(1) before the accused enters a plea. Both the Crown prosecutor and the defence counsel are responsible for this notification, ensuring that the accused is aware of the potential consequences of their plea and what could happen after sentencing. Thus, this provision aims to ensure a transparent and fair legal process that respects the rights of the accused. It is an integral component of the criminal justice system that reflects the principles of fairness, justice, and transparency. Adherence to these principles is crucial, especially in cases involving terrorism that often evoke public fear and anxiety. In conclusion, Section 83.27(2) of the Canadian Criminal Code is an essential provision that is designed to ensure that those charged with terrorist offenses are fully aware of the consequences of their plea before entering one. It reflects the principles of fairness, justice, and transparency, ensuring that a transparent and fair legal process is followed. The notification requirement also protects the rights of the accused, ensuring that they have the necessary information to make informed decisions throughout the legal proceedings.
STRATEGY
Section 83.27(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that requires the prosecutor to satisfy the court that the offender was notified about the application of subsection (1) before making a plea. Subsection (1) deals with the mandatory minimum sentence for certain terrorism offenses, and subsection (2) is designed to ensure that accused persons are aware of the consequences of pleading guilty to a terrorism offense. In this essay, we will explore some strategic considerations when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada, and suggest some strategies that could be employed by both prosecutors and defense counsel. One of the strategic considerations when dealing with section 83.27(2) is the timing of the notification. The prosecutor must satisfy the court that the offender was notified before making a plea, which means that the notification must be given at an appropriate time. In practice, this means that the notification should be given early in the proceedings, ideally at the same time as the charge is laid. This allows the accused person to make an informed decision about whether to plead guilty or contest the charge. If the notification is given too late in the proceedings, the accused person may argue that they did not have sufficient information to make an informed decision about their plea. Another strategic consideration is the form of the notification. Section 83.27(2) does not specify how the notification should be given, which means that prosecutors have some flexibility in how they provide the information to the accused person. In general, it is advisable to provide the notification in writing, as this creates a clear record of the notification and reduces the risk of disputes about whether the notification was actually given. The notification should also be clear and specific, and should include information about the mandatory minimum sentence that would apply if the accused person were to plead guilty to the offense. A further strategic consideration is the content of the notification. While section 83.27(2) requires the prosecutor to notify the accused person about the application of subsection (1), it does not require the prosecutor to provide any additional information. However, defense counsel may argue that the notification was inadequate if it did not provide sufficient information about the consequences of pleading guilty. To avoid this risk, prosecutors may choose to provide additional information about the mandatory minimum sentence, such as the circumstances in which it would apply and the likely length of the sentence. In terms of strategies that could be employed by prosecutors and defense counsel, one strategy for prosecutors is to provide the notification in a manner that reduces the risk of challenge by the accused person. This means providing the notification in writing, ensuring that it is clear and specific, and providing additional information if necessary. Another strategy for prosecutors is to use the mandatory minimum sentence as a bargaining chip in plea negotiations. This may involve offering a reduced sentence or charge in exchange for a guilty plea, with the knowledge that the accused person is aware of the mandatory minimum sentence that would apply if they went to trial and were convicted. For defense counsel, one strategy is to challenge the adequacy of the notification if there is any doubt about whether the accused person was informed of the consequences of pleading guilty. This may involve arguing that the notification was not provided in a timely manner, was not clear or specific, or did not provide sufficient information about the mandatory minimum sentence. Another strategy is to use the mandatory minimum sentence as a negotiating tool in plea bargaining, with the aim of securing a reduced sentence or charge for the accused person. In conclusion, section 83.27(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that requires prosecutors to notify accused persons about the application of the mandatory minimum sentence for certain terrorism offenses before they make a plea. This provision raises several strategic considerations for both prosecutors and defense counsel, including the timing, form, and content of the notification. Strategies that could be employed include providing clear and specific notification, using the mandatory minimum sentence as a bargaining chip in plea negotiations, and challenging the adequacy of the notification if necessary.