section 490.2(1)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section allows the Attorney General to apply for an order of forfeiture for indictable offences.

SECTION WORDING

490.2(1) If an information has been laid in respect of an indictable offence under this Act or the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, the Attorney General may make an application to a judge for an order of forfeiture under subsection (2).

EXPLANATION

Section 490.2(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the process and circumstances under which the Attorney General may apply for an order of forfeiture in relation to an indictable offence committed under the Act or the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act. This section applies to situations where the accused person is found guilty of an indictable offence and the Crown seeks to seize certain property or assets that are believed to have been acquired through or used in connection with the commission of the offence. The order of forfeiture itself is governed by subsection (2) of the same section, and it permits the court to order the forfeiture of any property that is considered to be proceeds of the crime or property that was used or intended to be used to commit or facilitate the commission of the offence. The aim of this provision is to deprive those who have benefitted from the indictable offence of the fruits of their illegal conduct and to deter others from engaging in similar behaviour. The Attorney General must make an application to a judge in order to receive an order of forfeiture. The judge will consider factors such as the nature and seriousness of the offence, the extent and value of the property in question, and any other relevant circumstances. The judge may also consider the interests of any third parties who have an interest in the property. In summary, section 490.2(1) provides a mechanism for the Crown to seize property acquired through or used in the commission of an indictable offence. An order of forfeiture may be granted by a judge if certain conditions are met, with the aim of deterring future criminal activity and punishing offenders by depriving them of their ill-gotten gains.

COMMENTARY

Section 490.2(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada allows the Attorney General to make an application to a judge for an order of forfeiture in the case of an indictable offence under the Criminal Code or the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act. This section is important because it allows the government to seize property that has been obtained through criminal activity. Forfeiture is a powerful tool that can be used to deter criminal activity and disrupt criminal organizations. Forfeiture is the process by which the government takes possession of property that is believed to have been involved in or obtained through criminal activity. The property can be any kind of asset, such as cash, vehicles, real estate, or other valuable items. Once the government has seized the property, it can be sold or disposed of in some other way. The proceeds from the sale are then used for various purposes, such as compensating victims of crime, funding law enforcement initiatives, or contributing to the general revenue of the government. Forfeiture laws are not unique to Canada. They exist in many other countries and are used to combat organized crime, drug trafficking, and other serious offences. The laws have been controversial in some cases, however, because they can be seen as violating the rights of individuals who have not been convicted of a crime. Critics argue that forfeiture laws can be abused and that innocent people can have their property seized without due process of law. In Canada, the law has been carefully crafted to balance the need for effective law enforcement with the protection of individual rights. Section 490.2(1) of the Criminal Code is part of a broader set of laws that govern the seizure and forfeiture of property in criminal cases. The law requires that the Attorney General make an application to a judge for an order of forfeiture. This means that the government cannot simply seize property on its own authority. The judge must review the evidence and determine whether the property is connected to criminal activity, and whether the forfeiture of the property is proportional to the seriousness of the offence. There are several benefits to forfeiture laws. First, they can be an effective deterrent to criminal activity. If criminals know that their ill-gotten gains can be seized by the government, they may be less likely to engage in criminal activity in the first place. Second, forfeiture laws can disrupt criminal organizations by taking away their assets. This can have a significant impact on the ability of organized crime groups to operate and can make it more difficult for them to continue their illegal activities. Finally, forfeiture laws can provide a source of funding for law enforcement initiatives and victim compensation programs. In summary, Section 490.2(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that allows the government to seize property that has been obtained through criminal activity. Forfeiture is a powerful tool that can be used to deter criminal activity, disrupt criminal organizations, and provide funding for law enforcement initiatives and victim compensation programs. While there are concerns about the potential abuse of forfeiture laws, the Canadian law has been carefully crafted to balance the need for effective law enforcement with the protection of individual rights.

STRATEGY

Section 490.2(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the Attorney General with the power to apply for an order of forfeiture in the case of an indictable offense under the Act or the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act. The order of forfeiture allows the government to seize certain assets, such as money or property, that were obtained through the commission of the offense. There are several strategic considerations that must be taken into account when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada. One of the most important considerations is whether or not the government has sufficient evidence to prove that the assets in question were obtained through the commission of the offense. The government will need to present compelling evidence to the judge in order to obtain an order of forfeiture, and if there are any doubts about the validity of the evidence, the application may be rejected. Another important strategic consideration is the potential financial impact of an order of forfeiture on the accused. If the assets in question are critical to the individual's livelihood, the government may be more likely to negotiate a plea deal or settlement in which the accused agrees to forfeit some of their assets in exchange for a reduced sentence. Given the potential severity of an order of forfeiture, it is also important to consider the potential impact on the individual's reputation and future opportunities. An order of forfeiture may have a significant impact on the individual's ability to get a job, obtain credit, or engage in other lawful activities, even if they are able to avoid a criminal conviction through a plea deal or other means. In order to navigate these strategic considerations effectively, there are several strategies that can be employed. First, it is important to work with an experienced criminal defense lawyer who has a track record of success in handling cases involving orders of forfeiture. An experienced defense lawyer will be able to navigate the complex legal landscape and develop an effective strategy that takes into account all of the potential consequences and implications. Another important strategy is to establish a strong defense case that challenges the validity of the evidence presented by the government. This may involve conducting a thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding the alleged offense, gathering evidence to support the accused's version of events, and presenting a compelling defense argument that undermines the government's case. Finally, negotiating a plea deal or settlement may be an effective strategy in some cases, particularly if the accused is facing substantial criminal charges and the potential consequences of an order of forfeiture are severe. A skilled defense lawyer may be able to negotiate a deal that involves forfeiting some assets in exchange for a reduced sentence or other favorable terms. Overall, navigating Section 490.2(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada requires careful attention to the legal and strategic considerations involved, as well as a comprehensive understanding of the potential consequences and implications of an order of forfeiture. By working with an experienced defense lawyer and developing an effective strategy, individuals can effectively navigate this complex legal landscape and protect their rights and interests.