section 164.1(4)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

If the person who posted the material does not appear for the proceedings, the court can still proceed to hear and determine the proceedings.

SECTION WORDING

164.1(4) If the person who posted the material does not appear for the proceedings, the court may proceed ex parte to hear and determine the proceedings in the absence of the person as fully and effectually as if the person had appeared.

EXPLANATION

Section 164.1(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court with the ability to proceed with a prosecution for criminal harassment in the absence of the person who posted the material in question. Ex parte proceedings are legal proceedings where only one party is present, and the court can make decisions without the other party being present. If a person has been charged with criminal harassment for posting material that is deemed harmful or threatening, they are required to appear in court for the proceedings. However, if they fail to appear, the court can proceed anyway and hear the case as if they were present. This is an important provision because it ensures that justice can be served even if the accused person chooses not to participate in the proceedings. The court must determine whether the material posted meets the definition of criminal harassment under the Criminal Code. This typically involves a careful examination of the content of the material and its impact on the victim. If the court finds that an offence has been committed, it can then impose a sentence or penalty on the accused person. Overall, Section 164.1(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that allows the court to proceed with a prosecution for criminal harassment even if the accused person does not appear. This ensures that justice can be served and victims of harassment can be protected from harm.

COMMENTARY

Section 164.1(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada states that if the person who posted offending material online does not appear for the legal proceedings, the court may continue with the case without their presence, hearing and determining the case as fully and effectively as if they were present. This section of the code is integral to ensuring that justice is served. Offenders who post unacceptable material online should be held accountable for their actions. However, in some cases, the person who posts the content may not show up for the court hearing. This section of the code ensures that even in such instances, justice can still be served. The purpose of this provision is multifold. Firstly, it ensures that the judicial process is not stalled or delayed due to the absence of the accused. The court can proceed with the case and give a verdict in their absence, thereby avoiding any delays or extended periods of limbo for the complainant. Secondly, this provision ensures that the accused cannot escape justice simply by avoiding the court. If the accused is aware of the legal actions against them but chooses not to appear in court, the court can still hear the case and make a decision in their absence. This makes it difficult for offenders to go unpunished for their actions. However, it is important to consider the potential downsides of this provision. For example, the accused may not be present to provide evidence that could help them dispute the allegations against them. In such cases, the court could potentially reach an unfair decision without considering all the relevant facts. Moreover, this section could be used to silence whistleblowers or critics. By not appearing in court, the accused may be able to avoid scrutiny and remain anonymous, which could lead to the suppression of dissent and criticism. This is particularly concerning when it comes to freedom of expression and investigative journalism. In conclusion, Section 164.1(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an essential component of the judicial process that ensures that justice can still be served even if the accused is absent from court proceedings. However, there are potential risks to consider, and the courts must strike a balance to ensure that the accused's right to a fair trial is protected while also ensuring that justice is served.

STRATEGY

Section 164.1(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision when dealing with cases related to posting of intimate images without consent. The provision empowers the court to proceed ex parte in the absence of the accused if they fail to appear for the proceedings. This means that the court can hear and determine the case in the absence of the accused as fully and effectually as if they had appeared in person. As such, strategic considerations must be taken into account when utilizing this provision to ensure favorable outcomes in cases related to cyber harassment. One of the strategic considerations when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada is the need to understand the circumstances under which the accused failed to appear for the proceedings. If the accused failed to appear because they were unaware of the proceedings and were not properly served with notice, the court may reschedule the case to allow the accused to appear in person. This means that the Crown must be diligent in ensuring that the accused is properly served with notice of the proceedings to avoid unnecessary postponements. Another strategic consideration is the need to present a strong case to the court in the absence of the accused. This means that the Crown must ensure that there is a strong case against the accused, which can be established through presenting compelling evidence to the court. The Crown must also make sure that they have submitted all the necessary documentation to the court before the hearing to avoid procedural delays or dismissals. It is also important to note that the accused may have legitimate reasons for failing to appear for the proceedings. For instance, the accused may have been injured or hospitalized, or they may have had a family emergency. In such cases, the court may reschedule the hearing to a later date or dismiss the case entirely. Therefore, the Crown must work closely with police officers to investigate the reasons for the accused's failure to appear to avoid unnecessary delays. One of the strategies that can be employed when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada is to ensure that police officers obtain as much evidence as possible before making an arrest. By having compelling evidence, Crown Prosecutors can build a solid case against the accused and increase the chances of obtaining a conviction in their absence. This approach not only helps reduce the number of cases that are dismissed but also ensures that victims of cyber harassment obtain justice. Another strategy is to work with the court to reschedule the hearing if the accused has legitimate reasons for failing to appear. By postponing the hearing, Crown Prosecutors can ensure that the accused has a chance to appear in person and defend themselves. This approach helps to ensure that the accused is serving justice and will help build trust in the legal system. In conclusion, Section 164.1(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision that empowers the court to proceed ex parte in the absence of the accused. However, strategic considerations must be taken into account when utilizing this provision to ensure that cases related to cyber harassment are determined effeciently. By building strong cases, submitting all necessary documentation, and working closely with the court, Crown Prosecutors can increase the chances of obtaining favorable outcomes in their cases.