section 83.14(5)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

If a judge is convinced that property is related to terrorist activities, it will be confiscated and handed over to the Attorney General or dealt with in accordance with the law.

SECTION WORDING

83.14(5) If a judge is satisfied on a balance of probabilities that property is property referred to in paragraph (1)(a) or (b), the judge shall order that the property be forfeited to Her Majesty to be disposed of as the Attorney General directs or otherwise dealt with in accordance with the law.

EXPLANATION

Section 83.14(5) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the forfeiture of property that is believed to be associated with terrorism or related offenses. This section provides the legal framework for the government to seize and dispose of property that is suspected to be used for promoting or supporting terrorism. The provision explains that if a judge is satisfied that the property in question is referred to in paragraph (1)(a) or (b), the judge shall order that the property be forfeited to Her Majesty. Paragraph (1)(a) refers to property that is owned or controlled by a terrorist group, while paragraph (1)(b) refers to property that is used to carry out a terrorist activity. Forfeiture of property is considered as an important provision in the fight against terrorism. This provision provides a legal tool for the government to remove financial resources that are used to fund terrorism. It also sends a strong message that Canada takes a zero-tolerance approach to terrorism and the use of violence to achieve political goals. The provision also highlights the importance of observing due process in the forfeiture of property. A judge can only order the forfeiture of property if they are satisfied on a balance of probabilities that the property is the subject of forfeiture. This means that the government must provide evidence to support their case before a judge can make an order for forfeiture. Overall, section 83.14(5) of the Criminal Code of Canada plays a crucial role in Canada's fight against terrorism. It provides a legal framework for the forfeiture of properties believed to be linked to terrorism, while also ensuring that due process is observed.

COMMENTARY

Section 83.14(5) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the forfeiture of property related to terrorist activities. It states that if a judge determines on a balance of probabilities that the property in question is related to such activities, then it shall be forfeited to the government and disposed of as directed by the Attorney General, or otherwise dealt with according to the law. This section of the Criminal Code is an essential tool in the fight against terrorism. By allowing the government to seize and dispose of property used or acquired for terrorist purposes, it creates a significant deterrent against such activities and also ensures that the proceeds of such activities cannot be used to further them. There are several reasons why the forfeiture of property is an effective tool for fighting terrorism. Firstly, it can prevent terrorists from using the ill-gotten gains of their activities to finance further attacks. Seizing and selling property can also provide a source of funding for counter-terrorism measures and deter others from engaging in terrorist activities. Furthermore, the forfeiture of property sends a message that terrorism will not be tolerated. It can be a powerful deterrent for those considering engaging in terrorist activities or those who may be providing support to terrorists. By taking away the assets that enable terrorists to carry out their activities, governments can send a clear message that such behavior will not be tolerated. However, it is crucial that this power is not abused. The section outlines the requirement for a judge to determine that the property is related to terrorism on a balance of probabilities, which ensures that the process is fair and transparent. There are also safeguards in place, such as the right to appeal the decision in court, to ensure that the rights of the individual are protected. It is also important to note that the section is narrowly tailored to apply only to those who are suspected of engaging in terrorist activities. It must not be used as a tool to target individuals or groups based on race, religion or political views. The section must be applied judiciously, and an abuse of power in this regard would be a violation of the principles of justice and due process. In conclusion, section 83.14(5) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a critical tool in the fight against terrorism. It allows the government to seize and dispose of property that is used or acquired for terrorist purposes. However, it is crucial that this power is not abused, and the process is transparent and fair. The forfeiture of property must be used judiciously and with due respect for individual rights. Ultimately, the use of this tool must be part of a broader strategy to prevent and combat terrorism, and not an end in itself.

STRATEGY

Section 587(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that outlines the process for delivering a particular to an accused person or their counsel. A particular is a document that provides specific details about the charge that an accused person is facing, including the time, place, and manner of the alleged offence. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, there are several strategic considerations that lawyers and accused persons must take into account. These include: 1. Timing: One key consideration is the timing of the delivery of the particular. Section 587(3) provides that a particular may be delivered at any time before or during the trial, but it is generally advisable to request it as early as possible. This will give the accused person and their counsel more time to review the specifics of the charge and prepare an appropriate defence. 2. Disclosure: Section 587(3)(a) requires the Crown to give a copy of the particular to the accused or their counsel without charge. However, there may be circumstances where the Crown fails to disclose certain information or provides an incomplete particular. In such cases, the accused person may need to request further disclosure or make a constitutional challenge based on a violation of their right to full disclosure. 3. Amendments: Section 587(3)(c) stipulates that the trial shall proceed as if the indictment had been amended to conform with the particular. This means that the particular effectively becomes part of the indictment, and any subsequent amendments to the indictment must also take the particulars into account. Therefore, it is important for accused persons and their counsel to carefully review the particulars and ensure that they are incorporated into the defence strategy. 4. Defence strategy: Once the particulars have been received and reviewed, accused persons and their counsel must develop an appropriate defence strategy. This may involve challenging the facts of the charge, seeking to have the charge dismissed, negotiating a plea bargain, or preparing for a trial. The specific strategy will depend on the particulars of the charge, the strength of the evidence, and the circumstances of the case. 5. Court procedures: Finally, accused persons and their counsel must be familiar with the court procedures for dealing with particulars. This includes ensuring that the particular is entered into the record, requesting any necessary adjournments or other accommodations, and making any necessary objections or arguments during the trial. Strategies that may be employed in dealing with section 587(3) of the Criminal Code include: 1. Timely requests for particulars: As noted, it is generally advantageous to request the particular as early as possible to give the accused person and their counsel more time to prepare a defence. 2. Vigorous disclosure requests: If the Crown fails to disclose certain information or provides an incomplete particular, the accused person may need to make additional disclosure requests or even challenge the constitutionality of the charge. 3. Careful review of particulars: Once the particulars have been received, accused persons and their counsel must pay careful attention to the facts of the charge and consider how they can be incorporated into the defence strategy. 4. Creative defence strategies: Depending on the particulars of the charge and the strength of the evidence, accused persons and their counsel may need to pursue creative defence strategies like a Charter challenge, a plea bargain, or a challenge to the admissibility of evidence. 5. Skilled courtroom advocacy: Finally, successful defence of a particular charge will require skilled courtroom advocacy, including effective cross-examination, clear and persuasive arguments, and strategic objections. In conclusion, section 587(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that outlines the process for delivering a particular to an accused person or their counsel. To maximize the chance of success, accused persons and their counsel must carefully consider the strategic implications of this provision, including timing, disclosure, amendments, defence strategy, and courtroom advocacy. Employing the right strategies can help to mitigate the impact of a particular charge and ensure that the accused person receives a fair trial.