section 696.3(3)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

This section allows the Minister of Justice to order a new trial or refer the matter to a court of appeal if there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a miscarriage of justice likely occurred, or dismiss the application.

SECTION WORDING

696.3(3) On an application under this Part, the Minister of Justice may (a) if the Minister is satisfied that there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a miscarriage of justice likely occurred, (i) direct, by order in writing, a new trial before any court that the Minister thinks proper or, in the case of a person found to be a dangerous offender or a long-term offender under Part XXIV, a new hearing under that Part, or (ii) refer the matter at any time to the court of appeal for hearing and determination by that court as if it were an appeal by the convicted person or the person found to be a dangerous offender or a long-term offender under Part XXIV, as the case may be; or (b) dismiss the application.

EXPLANATION

Section 696.3(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the powers of the Minister of Justice in the case of a potential miscarriage of justice. If it can be reasonably determined that such an injustice has occurred, the Minister may take several actions to rectify the situation. The first option available to the Minister is to order a new trial, to be held before any court that they deem appropriate. This may be necessary if it is believed that the original trial was not carried out fairly, or if new evidence has come to light that could change the outcome of the case. Additionally, in cases where the convicted person has been labeled as a dangerous or long-term offender, a new hearing may be ordered under Part XXIV of the Criminal Code. Alternatively, the Minister may refer the case to the court of appeal, to be treated as an appeal by the convicted person or the offender in question. This allows for a thorough review of the original trial and its outcomes, and may result in a new verdict or sentence. If the Minister determines that there is no reasonable basis to believe that a miscarriage of justice has occurred, they may dismiss the application made on behalf of the convicted person or offender. Overall, Section 696.3(3) allows the Minister of Justice to intervene in cases where there are concerns about the fairness of a trial or the accuracy of a verdict. This helps to maintain the integrity of the Canadian justice system, and ensures that all individuals are treated fairly and justly under the law.

COMMENTARY

Section 696.3(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to applications for a ministerial review of convictions or sentences. This section grants the Minister of Justice powers to direct a new trial or a new hearing under Part XXIV if satisfied that there is a reasonable basis to conclude that a miscarriage of justice likely occurred. The section also allows the Minister to refer the matter to the court of appeal for hearing and determination as if it were an appeal by the convicted person or the person found to be a dangerous offender or a long-term offender under Part XXIV, as the case may be. However, the Minister may dismiss an application if there is insufficient evidence to support the claim of a miscarriage of justice. This section provides an avenue for convicted persons who believe that they have been wrongfully convicted or sentenced to seek redress. It is an essential safeguard to prevent wrongful convictions and to ensure that justice is served. The powers granted to the Minister of Justice under this section demonstrate the government's commitment to upholding the rights of individuals and safeguarding the integrity of the justice system. The requirement for a reasonable basis to conclude that a miscarriage of justice likely occurred raises the threshold for granting a review. It ensures that only serious claims are considered and that frivolous applications are weeded out. The standard of a reasonable basis also indicates that there must be some evidence to support the claim of a miscarriage of justice. This requirement reflects the principle of fair and impartial tribunals, which is integral to the Canadian justice system. The provision for a new trial or hearing under Part XXIV is significant as it allows for a fresh start. The new trial or hearing offers the opportunity to present new evidence, scrutinize the evidence that led to the conviction or sentence, and address any errors or omissions in the trial proceedings. The ability to refer the matter to the court of appeal further enhances the importance of this provision, as it brings a higher level of scrutiny to the case and ensures that a more experienced and knowledgeable panel reviews the application. The power to dismiss an application is equally important. While the review process is essential to safeguarding individuals' rights, it must be balanced against the need to prevent frivolous or vexatious applications. The ability to dismiss an application with insufficient evidence serves as a warning to those who seek to exploit the review process. In conclusion, Section 696.3(3) of the Criminal Code is a crucial safeguard against wrongful convictions and sentences. The provisions for new trials, hearings under Part XXIV, and referral to the court of appeal demonstrate the government's commitment to upholding the rule of law. The requirement for a reasonable basis to conclude that a miscarriage of justice likely occurred ensures that only serious claims are considered. The power to dismiss an application with insufficient evidence ensures that the review process is not abused. Overall, Section 696.3(3) reinforces Canada's commitment to human rights and justice by providing a fair and accessible review process for those who have been wrongfully convicted or sentenced.

STRATEGY

Section 696.3(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides for the possibility of a new trial or hearing in cases of a miscarriage of justice. However, pursuing this avenue requires strategic considerations. Firstly, it is important to assess the strength of the grounds for a miscarriage of justice claim. An application under this section is not a guaranteed success, and the Minister of Justice has the power to dismiss it. Therefore, before proceeding, it is crucial to conduct a thorough investigation and gather evidence that supports the claim of a miscarriage of justice. This can involve consulting with legal experts, reviewing trial transcripts and conducting interviews with witnesses. Secondly, it is important to consider the potential consequences of pursuing a new trial or hearing. For example, a new trial could result in a harsher sentence if the prosecution is able to present a stronger case than in the previous trial. Alternatively, the accused may be found not guilty, resulting in a significant victory for the defence. However, it is important to understand that pursuing a new trial can be emotionally and financially draining for all parties involved. Thirdly, it may be strategic to engage with the media to increase public awareness of the case and put pressure on the government to act. This could involve providing interviews or press releases to reporters, generating social media content or organizing public protests. Such actions can help to raise the profile of the case and potentially increase the chances of success. Fourthly, it is important to consider the political climate of the country and the potential impact of pursuing a miscarriage of justice claim. For example, if the government is facing significant public pressure on justice issues, it may be more willing to initiate a new trial. However, if the government is focused on other issues, it may be less likely to devote resources to a miscarriage of justice claim. Finally, it is important to have a clear strategy for engaging with the government and legal system. This may involve identifying key decision-makers and influencers, developing a clear and compelling argument and preparing for potential pushback or resistance from government officials. In summary, pursuing a claim under Section 696.3(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada requires carefully considering the strength of the claim, the potential consequences of pursuing a new trial or hearing, engaging with the media, understanding the political climate and having a clear strategy for engaging with decision-makers.