section 563.1(1)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section outlines the process for an accused who elects to be tried by a judge without a jury and does not request a preliminary inquiry.

SECTION WORDING

563.1(1) If an accused re-elects under section 561.1 to be tried by a judge without a jury and does not request a preliminary inquiry under subsection 536.1(3), (a) the accused shall be tried on the information that was before the justice of the peace or judge at the preliminary inquiry, subject to any amendments that may be allowed by the judge by whom the accused is tried; and (b) the judge before whom the re-election is made shall endorse on the information a record of the re-election.

EXPLANATION

Section 563.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the procedures surrounding the election of an accused to be tried by a judge without a jury. If an accused decides to make this election under section 561.1 of the Criminal Code, they must follow certain protocols. One of these protocols is found in subsection (1) of section 563.1, which stipulates that if an accused re-elects trial without a jury and does not request a preliminary inquiry under subsection 536.1(3), their trial will be based on the information that was presented at the preliminary inquiry, subject to any amendments that may be allowed by the presiding judge. Essentially, this means that if an accused chooses to proceed with a trial by judge alone, they must do so without having the benefit of a preliminary inquiry. Preliminary inquiries are allowed under subsection 536.1(3) of the Criminal Code, and they are intended to be a fact-finding process that helps the accused and the Crown determine if there is enough evidence to proceed to trial. However, if an accused forgoes a preliminary inquiry and elects to be tried by judge alone, they will be tried solely on the information that was presented at the preliminary inquiry, with any necessary amendments. Finally, section 563.1(1) also requires that the judge before whom the re-election is made must record the election on the information. This serves as a way of documenting the accused's decision to waive their right to a jury trial and to go ahead with a judge-alone trial instead.

COMMENTARY

Section 563.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada sets forth the procedure to be followed when an accused exercises his or her right to elect to be tried by a judge without a jury. If the accused elects to waive his or her right to a trial by jury, they are then left with the choice of whether to request a preliminary inquiry. If the accused elects to forgo the preliminary inquiry, the trial judge shall try the accused on the information that was before the justice of the peace or judge at the preliminary inquiry, subject to any amendments that may be allowed by the judge. This section was added to the Criminal Code in 2002 as part of an overhaul of the criminal justice system. The purpose of this section is to streamline criminal proceedings and reduce the burden on the court system by encouraging accused persons to waive their right to a trial by jury. Jury trials can be time-consuming and expensive, as they require a larger pool of jurors, more court facilities, and longer trials. Judges are capable of making the same determinations of fact and law as a jury, and are often more experienced in interpreting complex legal issues. However, the decision to elect to be tried by a judge without a jury is not one that should be made lightly. The right to a trial by one's peers is a fundamental principle of Canadian justice and is enshrined in Section 11(f) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. A jury trial can offer an accused person a fair and impartial hearing, as the accused's fate is determined by a group of ordinary citizens who have been chosen by chance. The jury system is a cornerstone of democracy, and it is a right that should not be taken lightly. Furthermore, waiving the preliminary inquiry can be a risky proposition for an accused person. At the preliminary inquiry, the Crown must present evidence to demonstrate that there is a prima facie case against the accused. This means that the Crown must present enough evidence to demonstrate that a reasonable jury, properly instructed, could convict the accused. If the accused requests a preliminary inquiry, they can cross-examine the Crown's witnesses and make submissions concerning the adequacy of the Crown's evidence. This review of the Crown's case can lead to charges being dropped or amended, which can impact the outcome of the trial. In conclusion, Section 563.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides for a simplified process for accused persons who elect to be tried by a judge without a jury and do not request a preliminary inquiry. While this section can be a practical and efficient option in some circumstances, it is essential that accused persons fully understand the implications of waiving their right to a jury trial and failing to request a preliminary inquiry. These decisions should be made only after careful consideration and legal advice.

STRATEGY

Section 563.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an opportunity for an accused to re-elect to be tried by a judge without a jury. This section states that if an accused re-elects under section 561.1 and does not request a preliminary inquiry under subsection 536.1(3), they shall be tried on the information that was before the justice of the peace or judge at the preliminary inquiry, subject to any amendments that may be allowed by the judge by whom the accused is tried. Additionally, the judge before whom the re-election is made shall endorse on the information a record of the re-election. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are several strategic considerations. One strategic consideration is whether the accused wants to be tried by a judge or a jury. If the accused chooses to be tried by a jury, they should request a preliminary inquiry under subsection 536.1(3). This will allow them to preserve their right to a trial by jury and also give them the opportunity to learn more about the Crown's case against them. On the other hand, if the accused chooses to be tried by a judge alone, they should re-elect under section 561.1 and not request a preliminary inquiry. This will allow them to be tried on the information that was before the justice of the peace or judge at the preliminary inquiry, subject to any amendments that may be allowed by the judge by whom the accused is tried. Another strategic consideration is whether the accused wants to challenge the admissibility of evidence at trial. If the accused believes that certain evidence was obtained illegally or improperly, they may want to challenge its admissibility at trial. This could be done by making a motion to exclude the evidence under section 24(2) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, if the accused is going to make a section 24(2) application, they may want to consider requesting a preliminary inquiry. This will give them the opportunity to cross-examine the Crown's witnesses and gather evidence in support of their application. Another strategy that could be employed is to negotiate with the Crown for a plea bargain. If the accused has a strong case, they may be able to negotiate a favourable plea bargain with the Crown. This could result in a reduced sentence or even the withdrawal of charges. However, if the accused decides to take this route, they should be mindful of the fact that they will be giving up their right to a trial. In conclusion, there are several strategic considerations when dealing with section 563.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. Depending on the individual circumstances of the case, an accused may choose to elect to be tried by a judge or jury, challenge the admissibility of evidence, request a preliminary inquiry, or negotiate a plea bargain. Ultimately, the best strategy will depend on the facts of the case and the goals of the accused.