INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section states that the accused can request the presence of an analyst for cross-examination.
SECTION WORDING
117.13(2) The party against whom a certificate of an analyst is produced may, with leave of the court, require the attendance of the analyst for the purposes of cross-examination.
EXPLANATION
Section 117.13(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada gives the accused in a criminal case the right to cross-examine an analyst whose certificate has been produced as evidence against them. An analyst may be called upon to provide evidence in cases where the presence or quantity of a substance, such as drugs or alcohol, is a key issue. This section of the Criminal Code recognizes the importance of cross-examination as a fundamental aspect of the adversarial process in trials. It allows the accused to challenge the evidence presented by the prosecution and to test the credibility of the analyst's statement through questioning. This is crucial as the opinion of an analyst can be influential in criminal proceedings, and it is essential for the accused to have the opportunity to scrutinize and challenge that evidence. However, the right to cross-examination is not absolute, and the court has the power to grant or refuse leave to the accused. The court may refuse leave if it is satisfied that the accused's request is unnecessary or merely for delay or if the analyst is protected by a privilege, such as solicitor-client privilege. Overall, Section 117.13(2) of the Criminal Code ensures that the accused is given a fair opportunity to challenge and question the evidence presented against them in a criminal trial, promoting fairness and justice in the Canadian legal system.
COMMENTARY
Section 117.13(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada grants a party, against whom a certificate of an analyst is produced, the right to cross-examine the analyst after obtaining leave of the court. This has been recognized as a significant provision towards ensuring a fair trial for the accused. An 'analyst' refers to any person who has carried out a test or examination on a substance for the purposes of a criminal investigation, for example, a forensic scientist. The analyst's testimony is crucial to the prosecution's case, as evidence derived from their analysis will often form a basis for the charges against the accused. The certificate of an analyst is a document prepared by the analyst that outlines the results of the tests they have conducted. It provides evidence to the court, which can be used as part of the prosecution's case. The provision of Section 117.13(2) recognizes that the testimony of the analyst carries significant weight in criminal proceedings. As such, the accused has the right to cross-examine the analyst, in order to challenge their testimony, explore any biases or errors in the testing, and ultimately, to ensure that the evidence presented to the court is reliable. The provision also recognizes that the cross-examination of an analyst may require specialized knowledge, which may not be possessed by the accused or their counsel. In such cases, the court may allow for the accused to engage with a qualified expert witness, who can assist in cross-examination proceedings. The right to cross-examine an analyst has been recognized as a cornerstone of the Canadian justice system. It ensures that evidence presented to the court is subject to rigorous examination and scrutiny, and that the accused is afforded the opportunity to challenge and question any evidence that is presented against them. At the same time, the provision also recognizes the importance of ensuring that cross-examination proceedings do not unduly prolong the trial process, or unnecessarily burden the analyst. As such, the accused must first obtain leave of the court, demonstrating that cross-examination is necessary, and that the benefits of such proceedings outweigh any potential costs or delays. In conclusion, Section 117.13(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision that upholds the principle of fair trial in criminal proceedings. It recognizes the importance of the testimony of analysts, while at the same time ensuring that the accused is granted the right to challenge their evidence. It provides an important safeguard against the potential miscarriage of justice, and serves to uphold the core values of the Canadian justice system.
STRATEGY
Section 117.13(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an opportunity for the party against whom a certificate of an analyst is produced to cross-examine the analyst. This section presents both challenges and opportunities for the parties involved in the legal proceeding. In this essay, we will discuss some of the strategic considerations and strategies that can be employed to deal with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada. Strategic Considerations The first strategic consideration is whether to apply for the leave of the court to require the attendance of the analyst for cross-examination. This decision depends on various factors, such as the nature and complexity of the case and the importance of the analyst's testimony. If the analyst's testimony is critical to the case, it may be beneficial to cross-examine the analyst to challenge the credibility or reliability of the evidence provided by the analyst. However, if the case is straightforward, and the analyst's testimony is not essential, it may not be necessary to cross-examine the analyst. The second strategic consideration is the timing of the cross-examination. If one party decides to cross-examine the analyst, it is essential to do it at the right time. This decision may depend on the complexity of the case, the availability of the analyst, and the timeline set by the court. Cross-examining the analyst too early may provide an opportunity for the other party to challenge the evidence provided by the analyst. On the other hand, cross-examining the analyst too late may not allow the party to challenge the evidence properly. The third strategic consideration is the preparation of the cross-examination. Cross-examining an analyst requires careful preparation and planning. The party should review the evidence provided by the analyst, research the analyst's background and credentials, and identify any weaknesses or inconsistencies in the evidence. The party should also anticipate any questions or objections that the other party may raise during the cross-examination. Strategies The first strategy that can be employed is to challenge the credibility or reliability of the evidence provided by the analyst. The party can question the qualifications of the analyst, the methods used to obtain the evidence, or the accuracy of the analysis. By doing so, the party can weaken the evidence and provide an opportunity to question its validity. The second strategy is to use the cross-examination to clarify any issues or misunderstandings regarding the evidence. The party can ask the analyst to explain the evidence in more detail or provide additional information that may be helpful to the case. This strategy can be used to strengthen the evidence provided by the analyst and provide a more comprehensive understanding of the evidence. The third strategy is to use the cross-examination to challenge the other party's interpretation of the evidence. The party can ask the analyst to provide a different interpretation of the evidence or to explain how the evidence supports their argument. This strategy can be effective in providing an alternative view of the evidence and weakening the other party's argument. Conclusion Section 117.13(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an opportunity for the parties involved in a legal proceeding to cross-examine an analyst. This section presents both challenges and opportunities for the parties. To deal with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada, the parties should carefully consider their strategic options, including whether to cross-examine the analyst and when to do so, and should employ effective strategies to challenge the evidence provided by the analyst and strengthen their argument.