section 695(2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

An accused, with the prosecutors consent, may elect to have a new trial heard before a judge without jury or provincial court judge after the Supreme Court of Canada orders it.

SECTION WORDING

695(2) Subject to subsection (3), if a new trial ordered by the Supreme Court of Canada is to be held before a court composed of a judge and jury, the accused may, with the consent of the prosecutor, elect to have the trial heard before a judge without a jury or a provincial court judge. The election is deemed to be a re-election within the meaning of subsection 561(5) and subsections 561(5) to (7) apply to it with any modifications that the circumstances require.

EXPLANATION

Section 695(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the process for a new trial ordered by the Supreme Court of Canada. Specifically, it deals with the ability of the accused to elect to have the trial heard before a judge without a jury or a provincial court judge if the trial is to be held before a court composed of a judge and jury. The section indicates that this election can only be made with the consent of the prosecutor. In other words, both parties must agree to the choice of trial format. The election is deemed to be a re-election within the meaning of subsection 561(5), which refers to the ability of an accused person to change their election for trial format. Additionally, subsections 561(5) to (7) apply to this situation, with any necessary modifications to accommodate the circumstances. These subsections address the process for making an election and the consequences of changing an election. Overall, Section 695(2) provides an important mechanism for an accused person to have some control over the format of their trial. It recognizes that there may be circumstances where a judge-only trial may be more appropriate or advantageous. However, it also ensures that both parties have a say in the matter, and that the process for making such an election is clearly defined.

COMMENTARY

Section 695(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that grants an accused person the right to elect to have a new trial heard before a judge without a jury or a provincial court judge. This provision applies when a new trial has been ordered by the Supreme Court of Canada and is to be held before a court composed of a judge and a jury. The accused person is required to obtain the consent of the prosecutor to make this election. The section also provides that the election shall be deemed a re-election within the meaning of subsection 561(5) and that the provisions of subsections 561(5) to (7) shall apply to it with any modifications that the circumstances require. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that an accused person who has been granted a new trial by the Supreme Court of Canada has the right to choose the type of trial that they prefer. If the accused feels that a fair and impartial trial can be obtained through a judge, they may elect to have a trial without a jury. This decision is based on individual circumstances and may vary from case to case. The judge is an experienced legal professional who has the expertise to evaluate the evidence and make informed decisions which are not influenced by public opinion or emotions. The accused may prefer to have a trial with a judge only if they believe that the process may be quicker and more efficient. Alternatively, if the accused feels that the evidence is more complex, they may elect to have a trial with a jury where the evidence can be understood by a group of individuals with diverse life experiences. Moreover, this provision of the Criminal Code of Canada recognizes the importance of maintaining the principle of fairness in the legal system. It affords the accused person the opportunity to choose the type of trial they believe will provide the fairest outcome, recognizing the importance of their right to a fair trial. The section also ensures that the prosecutor plays a key role in the decision-making process by requiring their consent for the election. In conclusion, Section 695(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that affords the accused person the right to elect to have a new trial heard before a judge without a jury or a provincial court judge. It reflects the principle of maintaining fairness in the legal system and provides options for the accused person to choose the type of trial they believe will provide the fairest outcome. This provision demonstrates the commitment of the Canadian legal system to uphold the principles of justice and fairness in the administration of law for all its citizens.

STRATEGY

Section 695(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a powerful tool at the disposal of the accused when facing a new trial following an appeal. This section provides the option for the accused to elect to have the new trial heard before a judge alone, without a jury. This strategic choice should not be taken lightly, as it may have significant implications on the outcome of the trial. One key strategic consideration when dealing with Section 695(2) is the nature of the case itself. Depending on the circumstances of the case, it may be more advantageous for the accused to have the trial heard before a judge alone rather than before a judge and jury. For instance, in cases where the evidence is highly technical or complicated, a judge may be better equipped to understand and evaluate the evidence than a lay-jury. On the other hand, in cases where the accused is particularly sympathetic, a jury may be more likely to acquit the accused due to emotional factors. Another strategic consideration is the nature of the evidence against the accused. If the evidence is strong, the accused may choose to request a trial by judge alone to lessen the chances of an unfavorable verdict. This strategy may be particularly useful in cases where the evidence against the accused is overwhelming. Alternatively, if the evidence is weak or circumstantial, the accused may opt for a trial by jury in the hopes of a favorable verdict based on the emotional appeal of the case. Yet another strategic consideration is the personalities of the judge and prosecutor involved in the case. If the accused has had positive experiences with the judge in previous proceedings, it may be in their best interest to select a trial by judge alone. On the other hand, if the accused has had negative experiences with the prosecutor, they may choose a trial by jury in order to mitigate any potential bias on the part of the prosecutor. When dealing with Section 695(2), it is also important to keep in mind the potential risks involved in each strategic choice. For instance, while a trial by judge alone may eliminate the unpredictability of a jury, it may also lead to a harsher sentence if the judge is inclined toward a tougher stance on the crime in question. In addition, a trial by jury may be more likely to result in a hung jury or a mistrial, potentially leading to further delays in the process. Ultimately, the decision to elect for a trial by judge alone or by a judge and jury should be made after careful consideration of the nature of the evidence, the personalities involved, and the potential risks associated with each option. By employing a strategic approach to this section of the Criminal Code of Canada, the accused can increase their chances of a favorable outcome in their new trial.