INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section establishes which judge or court has jurisdiction when a plea has been taken but evidence has not yet been heard.
SECTION WORDING
669.1(1) Where any judge, court or provincial court judge by whom or which the plea of the accused or defendant to an offence was taken has not commenced to hear evidence, any judge, court or provincial court judge having jurisdiction to try the accused or defendant has jurisdiction for the purpose of the hearing and adjudication.
EXPLANATION
Section 669.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the jurisdiction of judges or courts to hear evidence and adjudicate on cases where the plea of the accused or defendant has been taken, but the hearing of evidence has not yet begun. In simple terms, this means that if a plea has been entered, but the hearing has not yet commenced, another judge or court may have jurisdiction to hear and decide the case. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that cases are efficiently handled, and justice is served in a timely manner. It allows for flexibility in the judicial process to ensure that an accused or defendant has access to a fair trial, despite any unforeseen circumstances that may arise. This section also recognizes the authority of judges or courts to adjudicate on cases, even if a different judge or court took the initial plea. This ensures that the judicial system operates effectively, and there is no undue delay in the administration of justice. Overall, Section 669.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada reinforces the importance of procedural fairness and efficiency in the Canadian judicial process, while also recognizing the authority of judges and courts to hear cases regardless of who took the initial plea.
COMMENTARY
Section 669.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the jurisdiction of judges, courts, and provincial court judges in criminal cases. The section provides that if a judge, court, or provincial court judge has taken the plea of an accused or defendant for an offense, but has not yet started the trial by hearing evidence, another judge, court, or provincial court judge with jurisdiction can take up the case for the purpose of hearing and adjudication. This provision of the Criminal Code is significant because it enables the smooth and efficient functioning of the criminal justice system. In practical terms, it means that if a judge or court is unable to proceed with a trial for some reason, the case does not have to be delayed indefinitely. Instead, another judge or court can take over the proceedings and ensure that justice is served in a timely manner. The provision is also an essential safeguard for the accused or defendant, who may face the risk of lengthy delays if the original judge or court is unable to continue with the trial. This is particularly important because delays in criminal trials can have serious consequences, including prolonged pre-trial detention, psychological harm to the accused or defendant, and a lack of closure for all parties involved. Furthermore, section 669.1(1) reflects the principles of judicial independence and the Rule of Law in Canada. It recognizes that judges and courts have the authority to hear and adjudicate criminal cases within their jurisdiction, and that this authority is not tied to a particular case or defendant but rather is vested in the judge or court itself. The provision ensures that the administration of justice can continue uninterrupted, regardless of individual circumstances or challenges that may arise. In conclusion, section 669.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada plays a vital role in ensuring the smooth functioning of the criminal justice system. It provides a mechanism for ensuring that criminal cases can be adjudicated effectively and efficiently, while also safeguarding the rights of the accused or defendant. As such, it is an essential provision for preserving the Rule of Law and upholding the principles of justice and fairness in Canadian society.
STRATEGY
Section 669.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an avenue for the Crown to transfer a case to another judge or court if the judge who took the accused's plea has not commenced to hear evidence. This provision serves as a strategic tool in criminal cases as it allows for the Crown to move a case to a judge who may be more favorable to their position or to a court with greater resources or specialized expertise. Defense counsel, on the other hand, may seek to oppose a transfer if they believe it may harm their client's interests. One strategy for the Crown in utilizing this provision is to carefully select the judge or court to which the case will be transferred. For example, if the case involves a complex legal issue, the Crown may seek transfer to a court with experience in that area of law. Similarly, if the case involves a particularly serious or high-profile crime, the Crown may seek transfer to a judge with a reputation for being tough on crime. Conversely, defense counsel may seek to oppose a transfer by arguing that their client will be prejudiced by a change in venue or judge. Another strategy for the Crown or defense is to use the provision as a bargaining tool in plea negotiations. For example, the Crown may offer to drop certain charges or seek a lighter sentence in exchange for the accused agreeing to a transfer of the case. Defense counsel, on the other hand, may agree to a transfer if it means their client can avoid a more severe sentence or a tougher judge. Finally, this provision may also be used strategically in cases where the judge who took the plea may have a conflict of interest or may otherwise be disqualified from hearing the case. For example, if the judge has a personal or professional relationship with one of the parties or has expressed bias against one of the parties in the past, a transfer may be appropriate. In such cases, the Crown and defense may agree to a transfer to avoid any appearance of impropriety or unfairness. In conclusion, Section 669.1(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a useful strategic tool for both the Crown and defense in criminal cases. It allows for the transfer of a case to another judge or court in certain circumstances and can be used to gain tactical advantages, settle disputes, or avoid conflicts of interest. Ultimately, the decision to seek a transfer will depend on the specific facts and circumstances of each case and should be carefully considered by both parties.