Criminal Code of Canada - section 688(1) - Right of appellant to attend

section 688(1)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

An appellant in custody has the right to be present at the hearing of their appeal, if they choose.

SECTION WORDING

688(1) Subject to subsection (2), an appellant who is in custody is entitled, if he desires, to be present at the hearing of the appeal.

EXPLANATION

Section 688(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines an appellant's right to be present at the hearing of their appeal if they are in custody. The right to be present at the hearing is an important aspect of the Criminal Code as it ensures that the appellant is able to participate in their appeal fully. This section acknowledges that an appellant has a choice in attending their appeal hearing, and it is not mandatory. However, if the appellant wishes to attend, they are entitled to do so. This decision may depend on a range of factors, such as their personal circumstances or the likelihood they would receive bail while waiting for their hearing. Section 688(1) also recognizes that there are exceptions to this entitlement under subsection (2). This subsection outlines that, in certain cases, an appellant may be excluded from attending their hearing. These include situations where the appellant may pose a security threat, where attending would be detrimental to the administration of justice, or where it is not practical to allow attendance, such as in complex, large-scale cases. Overall, it is essential that an appellant is given the opportunity to attend their appeal hearing, as it upholds the principles of fair trial rights. By being present at the hearing, the appellant is able to respond to any questions, provide their interpretation of events, and have their views taken into consideration in rendering a fair and just decision.

COMMENTARY

Section 688(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an important right to appellants who are in custody. This section guarantees the right of the appellant to be present at the hearing of the appeal if he or she so desires, subject to certain limitations. This provision is of significant importance as it is fundamental to the functioning of an effective justice system that the accused person is given an opportunity to participate fully in the criminal justice process, particularly when it comes to their appeal rights. This right of appeal is fundamental to securing justice in our society and to the protection of individual rights. It provides a necessary mechanism for the court to correct any errors or mistakes that may have occurred in the lower court. However, it is important to note that this particular right of appeal does not necessarily entail a right of release for a person in custody. The right to be present at the hearing of an appeal relates solely to the appellant's participation in the process, not to their release from custody. It is also worth noting that this right of present refers to the physical presence of the appellant in the courtroom. This means that the appellant can see and hear the proceedings, and can respond to any questions or arguments that may be made. Thus, it is considered a substantive right that is crucial to the right of an accused individual to a fair trial. However, it is important to note that this right is not absolute. Subsection (2) of section 688 of the Criminal Code states that in cases where the appellant is serving a sentence for a different offense, the court may make an order preventing the appellant from being present at the hearing. This may occur, for example, in cases where the appellant is deemed to be a flight risk or poses a threat to public safety. Further, there may be circumstances where the court determines that an appellant is not capable of participating in the hearings, even if they are physically present. For example, if the appellant is suffering from a severe mental illness, or if they are unable to comprehend the proceedings, then the court may determine that their presence at the hearing would not be conducive to justice. In such cases, the court may appoint a representative to act in the interests of the appellant, which could include speaking on their behalf. In conclusion, section 688(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada guarantees an important right to appellants who are in custody. This right ensures that the accused has an opportunity to participate fully in the criminal justice process, particularly when it comes to their appeal rights. While there may be limitations to this right, such as preventing the appellant from being present due to safety or mental health concerns, it remains a crucial aspect of our justice system. Ultimately, the right of an accused to be present at their own appeal guarantees their access to justice and reinforces the foundational values of our legal system.

STRATEGY

When dealing with section 688(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are several strategic considerations that need to be taken into account. This provision is important because it allows an appellant who is in custody to be present at the hearing of their appeal. However, this right is subject to certain limitations and exceptions, and there are several strategic considerations that need to be taken into account when deciding whether or not to exercise this right. One of the primary strategic considerations when dealing with section 688(1) is the potential impact on the appellant's case. If the appellant is in custody, it may be in their best interest to be present at the hearing of their appeal, as this can allow them to present evidence and arguments in support of their case. However, there are also risks associated with appearing in person, as the appellant may say something that could harm their case or they could be perceived negatively by the judge or jury. Another consideration is the practicalities of appearing in person. If the appellant is in custody in a remote location, it may be difficult for them to attend the hearing in person, and there may be logistical challenges associated with getting them to the courthouse. Additionally, if the appellant has a health condition or disability that makes it difficult for them to travel or be present in court, this may impact their decision to attend the hearing. Furthermore, there may be strategic considerations around whether the appellant should be represented by counsel at the hearing. If the appellant has legal representation, their lawyer can make arguments on their behalf and may be able to present evidence that supports their case. However, if the appellant does not have legal representation, they may struggle to present their case effectively and could be at a disadvantage. Considering these strategic considerations, there are several strategies that could be employed when dealing with section 688(1). One strategy is to weigh the potential benefits and risks of appearing in person and make a decision based on what will serve the appellant's case best. This may involve consulting with legal counsel or other advisors to help the appellant make an informed decision. Another strategy is to explore alternatives to appearing in person. For example, the appellant may be able to participate in the hearing via videoconference or telephone, which can reduce some of the logistical challenges associated with attending the hearing in person. Alternatively, the appellant could be represented by legal counsel, who can make arguments and present evidence on their behalf. Overall, there are several strategic considerations that need to be taken into account when dealing with section 688(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. By understanding the potential benefits and risks of appearing in person, and considering alternatives such as videoconferencing or legal representation, appellants can make informed decisions that serve their best interests.