section 465(7)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section states that if a person is alleged to have conspired to commit an offence and has been tried and dealt with outside Canada in a manner that warrants a plea of acquittal, conviction, or pardon if tried in Canada, they shall be deemed to have been tried and dealt with in Canada.

SECTION WORDING

465(7) Where a person is alleged to have conspired to do anything that is an offence by virtue of subsection (3) or (4) and that person has been tried and dealt with outside Canada in respect of the offence in such a manner that, if the person had been tried and dealt with in Canada, he would be able to plead autrefois acquit, autrefois convict or pardon, the person shall be deemed to have been so tried and dealt with in Canada.

EXPLANATION

Section 465(7) of the Canadian Criminal Code pertains to the legal concept of double jeopardy - the prohibition of trying an individual for the same offence twice. Specifically, this section addresses situations where an individual is alleged to have conspired to commit an offence that is subject to subsections (3) or (4) of Section 465 of the Criminal Code. These subsections outline offences related to participating in a criminal organization or committing an offence in association with a criminal organization. If an individual has already been tried and dealt with for these offences in a foreign jurisdiction in a manner that would prevent a trial in Canada due to double jeopardy, Section 465(7) stipulates that they will be deemed to have been tried and dealt with in Canada. This means that, in essence, if the person would be able to plead autrefois acquit (previously acquitted), autrefois convict (previously convicted), or pardon if they were tried in Canada, they cannot be tried again. Section 465(7) serves as a safeguard against individuals being held accountable for the same offence multiple times. It ensures that individuals cannot be subjected to additional punishment if they have already been dealt with in another jurisdiction. Furthermore, it ensures that the outcome of a trial and sentencing in a foreign jurisdiction is given similar legal weight as if it had occurred in Canada. In short, Section 465(7) of the Canadian Criminal Code reinforces the principle of double jeopardy while ensuring that individuals cannot escape accountability by simply fleeing Canada and being dealt with in another jurisdiction.

COMMENTARY

Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a legal provision that deals with the concept of double jeopardy. Briefly, double jeopardy is the principle that an individual cannot be prosecuted or punished for the same offense twice. This principle is recognized in the legal systems of many countries, and it is based on the fundamental idea that individuals should not be subject to repeated punishment for the same act. In Canada, the doctrine of double jeopardy is enshrined in section 11(h) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees that "any person acquitted or convicted of an offense is not to be tried or punished for it again." This means that if an individual has been tried and dealt with for an offense in Canada, they cannot be tried or punished for the same offense again. Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada extends the principle of double jeopardy to cases where an individual has been tried and dealt with for an offense outside of Canada. Specifically, if an individual is alleged to have conspired to commit an offense that would be an offense under subsection (3) or (4) of section 465 of the Criminal Code, and they have already been tried and dealt with for the offense outside of Canada in a manner that would allow them to plead autrefois acquit, autrefois convict, or pardon if they had been tried in Canada, then they cannot be tried or punished for the same offense in Canada. This provision is particularly relevant in cases where an individual has been extradited to another country to face charges. Extradition is the legal process by which one country surrenders an individual to another country for prosecution or punishment. When an individual is extradited, they are often tried and dealt with in the foreign country before being returned to their home country. Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada ensures that individuals who have already been tried and dealt with in this manner cannot be subjected to a second trial or punishment for the same offense in Canada. The inclusion of section 465(7) in the Criminal Code of Canada is an important safeguard against double jeopardy and ensures that individuals are not unfairly punished for the same offense twice. It also reinforces the principle that the legal systems of different countries should work together to ensure that justice is served and that individuals are not subject to multiple prosecutions for the same offense. In conclusion, section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a significant provision that protects the rights of individuals who have already been tried and dealt with for an offense outside of Canada. It ensures that the principles of double jeopardy are respected and that individuals are not subject to multiple prosecutions for the same offense. Overall, this provision serves as an important safeguard against arbitrary or unfair prosecution and reflects Canada's commitment to a fair and just legal system.

STRATEGY

Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada presents some important strategic considerations for individuals facing criminal charges that relate to conspiracies that could be deemed an offence by virtue of subsections (3) or (4). When dealing with this section, individuals and their legal counsel may consider a variety of strategies to help navigate the legal process and achieve a favorable outcome. One of the primary strategic considerations when dealing with Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada is whether or not an individual has already been tried and convicted in another jurisdiction. If so, they may be able to plead autrefois convict, which is a legal concept that refers to the fact that a person cannot be tried twice for the same offence. This strategy means that an individual's previous conviction in another jurisdiction would prevent them from being tried for the same offence again in Canada. However, this strategy may not always be applicable, particularly if the offence committed in the other jurisdiction is not the same as that for which an individual is being charged in Canada. Similarly, an individual may be able to plead autrefois acquit if they have previously been tried and acquitted of the same offence in another jurisdiction. This strategy would also prevent an individual from being tried for the same offence again in Canada, as they have already been found not guilty. However, like the autrefois convict strategy, this may not always apply, especially if the offence committed in the other jurisdiction differs from the one for which an individual is being charged in Canada. Another strategic consideration when dealing with Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada is whether or not an individual has received a pardon. If they have, they may be able to plead this as a defense, as a pardon essentially wipes a person's criminal record clean. This strategy may be particularly useful if an individual's previous conviction or offence was related to a similar conspiracy charge that they are now facing in Canada. In addition to these specific strategies, individuals and their legal counsel may also consider other strategic approaches when dealing with Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada. For example, they may seek to challenge the validity of the charge or the evidence being used against them, argue for a reduction in sentencing based on mitigating circumstances, or negotiate a plea bargain with the prosecution. Ultimately, the specific strategies employed when dealing with Section 465(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada will depend on the unique circumstances of each individual case. However, by considering these strategic considerations and working closely with a knowledgeable legal counsel, individuals facing criminal charges related to conspiracies can effectively navigate the legal process and position themselves for a favorable outcome.