INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section states that an applicants number of years of imprisonment without eligibility for parole will not be reduced if the jury cannot unanimously determine or concludes that it ought not to be reduced, or if the presiding judge determines that the jury is unable to unanimously determine it.
SECTION WORDING
745.63(4) The applicant’s number of years of imprisonment without eligibility for parole is not reduced if (a) the jury hearing an application under subsection (1) determines that the number of years ought not to be reduced; (b) the jury hearing an application under subsection (1) concludes that it cannot unanimously determine that the number of years ought to be reduced; or (c) the presiding judge, after the jury has deliberated for a reasonable period, concludes that the jury is unable to unanimously determine that the number of years ought to be reduced.
EXPLANATION
Section 745.63(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision relating to the eligibility for parole of offenders who have been sentenced to life imprisonment. Specifically, it sets out circumstances in which an offender's number of years imprisonment without eligibility for parole will not be reduced. Subsection 1 of section 745.63 allows a person who has been sentenced to life imprisonment without eligibility for parole for a minimum period of 10 years to apply for their parole eligibility to be reduced to a number of years less than their total sentence. The application is heard by a jury which must unanimously agree on a reduced number of years. If the jury cannot agree or determines that the number of years ought not to be reduced, the applicant's number of years of imprisonment without eligibility for parole is not reduced. The provision aims to ensure that parole eligibility for offenders serving life imprisonment sentences is not reduced unless there is clear agreement among the jury. It balances the need to protect the public and ensure punishment for offenders with the potential for rehabilitation and a second chance at life. The provision gives discretion and authority to the presiding judge to end deliberations if the jury is unable to reach consensus. Overall, section 745.63(4) reflects Canada's approach to balancing punishment, public safety, and rehabilitation in the criminal justice system.
COMMENTARY
Section 745.63(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the circumstances in which an applicant's number of years of imprisonment without eligibility for parole will not be reduced following an application for reduction. This section of the Criminal Code is a critical component of Canada's justice system because it ensures that individuals who have committed serious crimes and whose parole eligibility has been eliminated due to their actions will not have their sentence reduced if the jury or the presiding judge concludes that there is no basis for a reduction. The reasons provided in Section 745.63(4) for the refusal to reduce an applicant's sentence include when the jury hearing an application under subsection (1) determines that the number of years should not be reduced. This provision is critical as the decision to reduce a sentence must be driven by the principles of justice and fairness, and if there are extenuating circumstances or the applicant is not remorseful, then the number of years of imprisonment without eligibility for parole must remain unchanged. The second scenario outlined in this section is when the jury hearing an application under subsection (1) concludes that it cannot unanimously determine that the number of years ought to be reduced. In this case, it is critical to note that the verdict of the jury must be unanimous as the decision to grant a reduction in sentence is a delicate and complex process that must be measured and considered. It must be based on evidence, mitigating factors, and the nature of the crime committed. Finally, the presiding judge, after the jury has deliberated for a reasonable period, can conclude that the jury is unable to unanimously determine that the number of years ought to be reduced. This provision allows the presiding judge to intervene when the jury cannot deliver a verdict and ensures that the justice system is not stalled due to a lack of consensus by the jury. Ultimately, this section of the Criminal Code of Canada is essential in safeguarding the integrity and fairness of Canada's justice system. The provision ensures that those who have committed serious crimes and have had their parole eligibility eliminated due to their actions are not granted clemency easily. The requirements set out in Section 745.63(4) provide checks and balances to ensure that any reduction in sentence is justified and that those who have been convicted of serious crimes are held accountable for their actions. This provision is also critical in ensuring that victims of crime can have some peace of mind that justice has been served and that those who have harmed them are being held accountable for their actions. In conclusion, Section 745.63(4) is a critical component of the Criminal Code of Canada, as it safeguards the integrity of Canada's justice system by ensuring that only those who meet specific criteria are granted a reduction in their sentence. This section is a necessary component of Canada's Criminal Code as it ensures that justice is served while providing fairness and balance to the justice system.
STRATEGY
Section 745.63(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada governs reduction of parole ineligibility for those convicted of murder. An applicant who has been sentenced to life imprisonment without eligibility for parole for a number of years may apply to have their parole eligibility reduced after they have served the required number of years. This section, however, restricts the reduction of the applicant's number of years of imprisonment without eligibility for parole, which can be an obstacle to securing a reduced parole eligibility period. One consideration when dealing with this section is the trial strategy. As per Section 745.63(4)(a), the jury hearing the application under subsection (1) may determine whether the number of years ought to be reduced. This means that the accused's defence lawyer should focus on arguing persuasively that the applicant should be entitled to a reduction of their parole eligibility period, as otherwise, the applicant may not be successful in obtaining a reduction. Another factor is the composition of the jury. The defence should try to secure a jury that is sympathetic to their case and is not predisposed to imposing lengthy parole ineligibility periods. The selection of jurors is key, and experienced criminal defence counsel can challenge for cause and make preemptory strikes to ensure that a jury that is sympathetic to the case of the applicant is selected. A third consideration is witness testimony. Witnesses can offer evidence that can sway the jury in favour of the applicant. By presenting persuasive and coherent evidence, the defence can demonstrate that the accused is entitled to a reduction of their parole eligibility period. Statements from professionals may be critical in reducing the parole ineligibility period, such as statements from mental healthcare professionals who attest to the applicant's rehabilitation and positive progress since their incarceration. The defence counsel should ensure that the party's case is adequately supported by expert testimony from social workers, counselling psychologists, psychiatrists, and neuropsychologists, among others. A fourth consideration is the use of circumstantial evidence. The defence may present previous cases where the juries have reduced the parole ineligibility period for similar offence cases before. This will support the position of the defence counsel and enhance the chances of the applicant's parole eligibility being reduced. In addition, the defence can also rely on similar cases that have seen a successful outcome to strengthen their argument. For instance, if the defendant was convicted of a similar crime, and a similar case yielded a reduction of parole eligibility, then it may make sense to rely on that case as influence. In conclusion, appealing for a reduction of the parole ineligibility period under Section 745.63(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada can be challenging. The defence will need to be strategic and think carefully about the composition of the jury, the evidence presented, and the arguments they present to persuade the court. It requires preparation and strategic thinking, with an experienced and skilled lawyer to guide the defendant through the process.