section 629(2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section specifies the requirements for a written challenge of a jurors impartiality or misconduct in the Criminal Code of Canada.

SECTION WORDING

629(2) A challenge under subsection (1) shall be in writing and shall state that the person who returned the panel was partial or fraudulent or that he wilfully misconducted himself, as the case may be.

EXPLANATION

Section 629(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the procedure for challenging the impartiality of a jury panel in criminal proceedings. Essentially, if a party to a criminal trial believes that the individual who selected the jury panel was biased, fraudulent, or engaged in willful misconduct, they can challenge the panel in writing. This provision recognizes the importance of having an impartial jury panel in criminal trials. If the person responsible for selecting the jurors is shown to be biased or acting fraudulently, it undermines the entire trial process and the legitimacy of any verdict that may result. In practical terms, a challenge under this provision would involve submitting a written statement outlining the grounds for the challenge. This could include evidence that the individual who selected the jurors had a personal bias against the accused or the prosecution, or that they engaged in some kind of misconduct during the selection process. It is worth noting that challenges to jury panels are relatively rare, and only occur in exceptional circumstances. However, the fact that this provision exists underscores the importance of impartiality in the criminal justice system, and reflects Canada's commitment to fair and just legal proceedings.

COMMENTARY

Section 629(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the process of making a challenge to a jury panel selection. The provision requires that any challenge must be in writing and must clearly state the reasons for the challenge. These reasons may include alleging that the person who returned the panel was biased, fraudulent, or engaged in misconduct. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that the jury selection process is fair and transparent. It provides an opportunity for parties in a criminal trial to challenge a jury panel if they believe that there is a potential for bias or unfairness. At the same time, this provision also ensures that challenges are not made frivolously or without merit, as they must be submitted in writing and clearly state the reasons for the challenge. One of the most significant reasons for a challenge under Section 629(2) is that the person who returned the jury panel was partial or biased. This could occur if, for example, the individual responsible for selecting the panel had a personal relationship with one of the accused or had a bias against a certain demographic group. In such cases, there is a risk that the jury panel would not be representative of the community and could potentially be biased against one or more of the accused. Another reason for a challenge under Section 629(2) is if the jury panel was fraudulent. This could occur if, for example, false information was provided during the selection process in an attempt to influence the composition of the panel or if jurors were added to or removed from the panel without proper authorization. Such fraud could potentially undermine the credibility of the jury panel and leave the accused without a fair trial. Finally, a challenge may be made if the person responsible for selecting the panel wilfully misconducted himself or herself. This could occur if, for example, the individual in question engaged in behavior that was contrary to the standards of impartiality and fairness expected during the jury selection process. Such behavior could include accepting bribes, intentionally excluding certain individuals from the panel, or engaging in other corrupt activities. Overall, Section 629(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that helps to ensure the fairness and integrity of the criminal justice system. By providing a mechanism for challenges to jury panel selection, it helps to promote transparency and accountability in the jury selection process. At the same time, it ensures that challenges are not made without merit and that the grounds for the challenge are clearly stated in writing. Ultimately, this provision helps to ensure that the accused are afforded a fair trial and that justice is served.

STRATEGY

Section 629(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that allows parties in a criminal trial to challenge the impartiality of potential jurors. The provision grants the right to challenge potential jurors if they believe that the person who returned the panel was partial, fraudulent, or willfully misconducted themselves. This provision is essential to ensure that the outcome of a criminal trial is fair and just. One strategic consideration when dealing with Section 629(2) is that it should only be used when there is a reasonable belief that the potential juror is biased or has a conflict of interest. Making frivolous or baseless challenges can lead to the court losing faith in the credibility of the attorney or the legal system as a whole. An attorney should, therefore, be careful and strategic in deploying a challenge to ensure that it serves a legitimate purpose. Another strategic consideration is that the challenge should be made in writing and presented to the court as soon as possible. All relevant evidence that supports the challenge, such as the background of the potential juror, should be included in the challenge. The attorney should take care to ensure that the challenge is based on facts and evidence, not conjecture or hearsay. One strategy that could be employed when making a challenge under Section 629(2) is to conduct a thorough investigation into the backgrounds of the potential jurors. This investigation can include analyzing their social media profiles, background checks, and interviews with people who know them. The purpose of this investigation is to gather evidence that supports the challenge. Another strategy is for an attorney to present their challenge in a persuasive and respectful manner. They should avoid making the challenge personal or attacking the integrity of the potential juror. Instead, they should present their argument in a calm, measured, and respectful way. Finally, attorneys should prepare for the eventuality that their challenge is unsuccessful. If a challenge is unsuccessful, the attorney should have a strategy in place for how to proceed with the trial. Failure to do so can lead to the attorney losing credibility and damaging their client's chances of a fair trial. In conclusion, Section 629(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a critical provision that allows parties in a criminal trial to challenge the impartiality of potential jurors. Attorneys must exercise caution and diligence when making a challenge to ensure that they can provide credible evidence to support their claims. Employing strategies such as investigating potential jurors' backgrounds, presenting the challenge persuasively, and preparing for unsuccessful challenges can increase an attorney's chances of success.