INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section outlines the process for challenging a juror whose name does not appear on the panel.
640(1) Where the ground of a challenge is that the name of a juror does not appear on the panel, the issue shall be tried by the judge on the voir dire by the inspection of the panel, and such other evidence as the judge thinks fit to receive.
Section 640(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada governs challenges to jury panels in criminal trials. When a juror's name does not appear on the panel, the defendant can challenge the juror on the grounds of this omission, and the issue will be tried by the judge during the voir dire, the process used to select jurors. During the voir dire process, the judge will inspect the panel to verify whether the juror's name is indeed missing. Additionally, the judge may allow other evidence to be presented to determine whether a mistake has been made. Depending on the evidence presented, the judge may decide to strike the individual's name from the panel or allow them to join the jury. The importance of this section lies in its ability to ensure the selection of a fair and impartial jury. A juror's name omitted from the panel could result in a bias toward one party or another, as the makeup of the jury would change. This section, therefore, prevents the possibility of undue influence on the jury selection process, guaranteeing the defendant's right to a fair trial. In conclusion, section 640(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada protects the integrity of the jury selection process by allowing for challenges to the panel in instances where a juror's name is missing. By safeguarding the impartiality of the jury, this section ensures a fair trial for all parties involved.
Section 640(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the situation where a juror's name does not appear on the panel and provides for a procedure to resolve the issue. The panel is the list of potential jurors from which the trial jury is selected. The grounds for a challenge to a juror can include any reason that may affect the juror's impartiality, such as a relationship to the accused or the victim, bias, or conflict of interest. The absence of a juror's name on the panel could be either an administrative error or an intentional omission. The section requires that, in case of a challenge on this ground, the issue shall be tried by the judge on the voir dire. Voir dire is a preliminary examination of potential jurors to determine their suitability to serve on a jury. In this case, the judge will examine the panel to determine if the missing name was due to an administrative error or an intentional omission. The judge may also accept any other evidence that they think is relevant to the issue. The proceeding will be conducted without the presence of the jury. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that the jury is selected from a properly constituted panel that includes all eligible and qualified jurors. The absence of a juror's name on the panel could lead to an unfair trial if the person was not included due to an intentional omission, or if their absence results in a biased or unrepresentative jury. The voir dire procedure enables the judge to investigate the issue and make a determination of whether there was any impropriety in the selection process. The provision underscores the importance of transparency and fairness in the selection of jurors. It also reflects the principle of the presumption of innocence, which requires that an accused person be tried by an impartial jury. The judge's examination of the panel and the evidence presented ensures that the jury is selected in a manner that upholds the accused's right to a fair trial. In conclusion, section 640(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a mechanism for dealing with challenges to the absence of a juror's name on the panel. Its purpose is to ensure that the jury is selected from a properly constituted panel and to uphold the accused's right to a fair trial. The provision reflects the importance of transparency and fairness in the criminal justice system and underscores the principle of the presumption of innocence.
Section 640(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that deals with challenges to the composition of a jury. It provides the legal framework for determining whether a juror was properly selected and included in the panel. In this article, we will discuss the strategic considerations that should be taken into account when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, as well as some strategies that could be employed to address any issues that arise. One important consideration when dealing with Section 640(1) is to understand the nature of the ground of challenge. A challenge based on the absence of a juror's name on the panel is a technical challenge, which means that it does not require any evidence of actual bias or prejudice on the part of the juror. This is in contrast to challenges for cause, which are based on specific circumstances that may affect a juror's ability to be impartial. Given the technical nature of challenges based on Section 640(1), it is important to gather as much information as possible about the composition of the jury panel. This can be done by reviewing the jury list and any other relevant documents, such as juror questionnaires or registration forms. It is also important to understand the procedures that were followed during the selection process, including whether the requisite number of jurors was randomly selected from the list of potential jurors. One strategy that could be employed when dealing with a challenge based on Section 640(1) is to focus on the specific requirements set out in the Criminal Code. For example, the Code requires that the names of potential jurors be selected randomly from the electoral list, and that at least 12 jurors be selected for each trial. If it can be shown that these requirements were not followed, it may be possible to challenge the validity of the entire jury panel. Another strategy that could be employed is to challenge the decision of the jury selection officer. Section 633 of the Criminal Code provides that the jury selection officer has the authority to decide whether a person is qualified to serve as a juror. However, this decision can be appealed to a judge, who can determine whether the officer's decision was reasonable. In addition to these strategies, there are other factors that should be taken into account when dealing with Section 640(1). For example, it is important to consider the timing of the challenge. Challenges based on this section must be made at the beginning of the trial, before the jury is sworn in. If a challenge is made later in the trial, it may not be allowed unless there are exceptional circumstances. Overall, the strategic considerations involved in dealing with Section 640(1) of the Criminal Code require a careful analysis of the facts and circumstances of each case. By understanding the legal framework and taking a strategic approach, it may be possible to challenge the composition of the jury panel and ensure that a fair trial is conducted.