INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

Courts must provide reasons for not adding a condition to a recognizance order.

SECTION WORDING

810(3.12) Where the justice or summary conviction court does not add a condition described in subsection (3.1) to a recognizance order, the justice or summary conviction court shall include in the record a statement of the reasons for not adding the condition.

EXPLANATION

Section 810(3.12) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that requires a court to provide a statement of reasons when it decides not to include a condition in a recognizance order. This section falls under section 810 of the Criminal Code, which outlines the process for obtaining a peace bond or recognizance order. Recognizance orders are commonly used in cases where an individual is suspected of posing a risk to a specific person or the public in general. This order requires the individual to keep the peace and be of good behaviour, and may also include conditions such as not possessing weapons or not communicating with the individual they are alleged to pose a risk to. Subsection (3.1) of section 810 outlines a list of specific conditions that a court may add to a recognizance order if it is deemed necessary to protect the identified individual or the public. If the court decides not to add any of these conditions, section 810(3.12) requires the court to explain its reasoning in writing and include it in the record of the case. This provision emphasizes the importance of transparency in the decision-making process of the court, and ensures that the reasons for not imposing certain conditions are clearly documented. It enables the court to create a record of their decision-making process, which can be referred to in the future if necessary. In summary, section 810(3.12) of the Criminal Code of Canada requires the court to provide written reasons for not imposing specific conditions in a recognizance order. This provision promotes transparency and accountability in the justice system and ensures that all decisions made are documented for future reference.

COMMENTARY

Section 810(3.12) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial provision that seeks to ensure the due process of law is observed when imposing specific conditions on the accused person. In essence, this provision requires that when a justice or summary conviction court fails to include a condition described in subsection (3.1) while issuing a recognizance order, they should provide a clear statement outlining the reasons for their decision. This provision is critical in ensuring that judicial officers exercise their discretion in a fair, transparent, and accountable manner. The primary objective of Section 810(3.12) is to prevent the arbitrary imposition of conditions on accused persons without justifiable cause. It recognizes that the imposition of conditions on an accused person can have a significant impact on their rights, including their liberty, freedom of movement, and right to privacy. Therefore, when imposing conditions, the judge or summary conviction court must ensure that they are necessary, reasonable, and proportionate to the offense committed. Additionally, this provision enables appellate courts to review a judicial officer's decision and determine whether they exercised their discretion appropriately. If the appellate court finds that the judge or summary conviction court ought to have added a condition but failed to do so, they can order that the condition is included in the recognizance order. This helps to safeguard against any potential miscarriage of justice that may result from the imposition of unwarranted conditions. Moreover, Section 810(3.12) also promotes the principle of transparency and accountability in the criminal justice system. The provision mandates judicial officers to provide a clear and detailed statement outlining their reasons for not adding a condition to a recognizance order. By doing so, they are held accountable for their decision, which fosters public trust and confidence in the justice system. Additionally, the statement serves as a record that can be accessed in the future for review or appeal purposes. However, while Section 810(3.12) is a commendable provision, there is room for improvement. For instance, the provision does not provide specific guidance on what constitutes justifiable reasons for not adding a condition to a recognizance order. Therefore, judicial officers may have varying interpretations of what constitutes valid reasons and may exercise their discretion inconsistently. Additionally, the provision does not provide any consequences for judges or summary conviction courts who fail to provide a statement of reasons as required. This may encourage some judicial officers to disregard the provision, which undermines its effectiveness. In conclusion, Section 810(3.12) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a significant provision that helps to ensure that conditions imposed on accused persons are necessary, reasonable, and proportionate. It promotes transparency, accountability, and consistency in the exercise of judicial discretion. However, there is a need for more specific guidance on what constitutes valid reasons for not imposing conditions, and consequences for judicial officers who fail to provide a statement of reasons as required. Overall, this provision remains a critical component of ensuring that the criminal justice system operates fairly and justly.

STRATEGY

Section 810(3.12) of the Criminal Code of Canada requires the justice or summary conviction court to provide a statement of reasons when not adding a condition described in subsection (3.1) to a recognizance order. This provision has important implications for the way that lawyers and defendants approach situations where recognizance orders are being considered. Recognizance orders are a type of court order that requires an individual to abide by certain conditions in order to avoid further legal consequences. These orders can be used in a variety of situations, such as in cases where someone has been charged with a criminal offence and is awaiting trial. Recognizance orders can be an effective tool for managing risk and ensuring public safety, but their use must be balanced against the rights of the individual being placed under the order. One of the key strategic considerations when dealing with section 810(3.12) is the importance of providing the court with compelling reasons for why a particular condition should be included in a recognizance order. This means carefully selecting and presenting evidence that supports the need for the condition, as well as making persuasive arguments that connect the condition to the specific risks or concerns in the case. Another important consideration is understanding the legal and procedural requirements surrounding recognizance orders. Lawyers must be familiar with the relevant legislation, case law, and court rules that apply to these orders, as well as any local court practices and procedures. This knowledge can help them to identify potential issues or challenges that may arise in the process of seeking or challenging a recognizance order. In terms of specific strategies that could be employed when dealing with section 810(3.12), there are several approaches that lawyers could take. One strategy is to focus on building a strong factual record that supports the need for the condition in question. This could involve gathering relevant documents, obtaining witness statements or expert opinions, or conducting investigations to uncover relevant information. Another strategy is to make use of the court's procedural rules to carefully frame and structure the case for adding or excluding a particular condition. This might involve filing motion materials or written submissions that highlight the legal and factual arguments in support of the requested condition. Lawyers may also choose to present their case orally in court, using persuasive language and effective advocacy techniques to make their case. Ultimately, the key to successfully navigating section 810(3.12) is to be prepared, organized, and strategic in approach. Lawyers and defendants who are able to effectively communicate their arguments and evidence to the court will be more likely to achieve their desired outcome in cases where recognizance orders are being considered. By carefully considering the implications of this provision and developing effective strategies for working within its framework, lawyers can help their clients to navigate the legal system with greater confidence and success.