Liberals proposing a new system to unclog the court delays.

[Queen K]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal ... -1.4598480

Will it work or not?

[Ka-El]

Will it work or not?

Dunno know, but that was a great article that quite accurately explains some of the issues or concerns. Will it work? I can’t say for sure what impact some of these proposed measures might have, but at least we are making some concrete efforts to try and improve the situation created by successive governments, federal and provincial, that somehow figured just cutting spending to the criminal justice system would somehow reduce crime and speed up the process.

I really do like the idea of having a separate Court to deal with administration of justice offences (when offenders are charged for not complying with the conditions on their police or court orders), as under the current under-resourced situation Crown is under pressure not to approve anything but the most serious aggressions, such as violating a no-contact condition. Offenders feel little pressure to comply with their conditions (reporting, abstaining, etc.) as they know the consequences are anything but immediate, if at all, and they can wait to deal with them when dealing with other charges. In that way they can deal with matters globally and get a stay entered on at least a few of the charges they might have before them (usually the breaches). Additionally, when convicted on multiple counts at the same time, the sentences most often run concurrently, as opposed to consecutively (in other words, a 7 days jail for a breach means nothing if you are already serving 90 days for assault).

Not much impetus to obey any Court-ordered conditions if you know there is going to be little consequence, if any, for breaching them. Ironically, the more dangerous and at risk to reoffend a guy is, the more likely he is to know this current truism created by years of reckless cuts under previous governments. Yes, we’ve been “saving” money all over the place. It would be nice to see administration of justice offences dealt with separately and real consequences imposed when offenders are convicted for failing to comply with their police or Court-ordered conditions.

As noted in the article, "Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, any person charged with an offence has the right not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause," says background material from the Department of Justice. "However, the current bail regime is outdated, complex and relies on measures that fail to increase the safety of our communities."

Cutting spending up front doesn’t always save money down the road. I would hope that especially in this province people would recognize that reckless cuts do not always reduce costs in the long term. Crime does not go down just because you cut Court staff and close courthouses – especially when you decide to make cuts to the already leanest public service in the country for purely ideological and partisan reasons.

Cuts to Legal Aid have also slowed down the process considerably. Most people, despite their Charter right to legal representation, no longer qualify for any legal assistance from Legal Aid (make too much money working part-time at Tim Hortons), and many will try to represent themselves causing all kinds of delays. As also noted in the article, the proposed measure to drastically reduce the number of preliminary inquiries could end up costing us more in the long run. Just cutting spending on things without first understanding what their impact and purpose is can be counterproductive and costly.

Not normally a big fan of defense lawyers, but point taken …

The bill will restrict preliminary inquiries to those accused of an offence punishable by life imprisonment, which is expected to reduce the number of preliminary inquiries by 87 per cent. There are now more than 9,000 a year.

But many criminal defence lawyers are opposed to the idea, saying it could have the opposite effect, since the preliminary inquiry process can weed out some cases that don't have enough evidence to go to trial.

"What we know is that the preliminary inquiry takes up about three per cent of the time in the Ontario Court of Justice," said criminal defence lawyer Michael Spratt. "We also know that that preliminary inquiry ends up saving a lot of time down the road.

"It narrows issues, it shortens trials and sometimes it eliminates the need for trials, but of course when the preliminary inquiry is eliminated in the vast majority of cases we won't have those benefits."

“What does this do? I don’t know, let’s cut it”

[hobbyguy]

It's 300 page bill, and waay too complex for me. However, watching "Power and Politics" yesterday, the pundits, NDP, Conservative, and Liberal agreed it is well thought out legislation that addresses systematic issues. Even Stockwell Day thought it was good legislation...

I would comment that my understanding is that this legislation is a result of lengthy systems review, and appears to aimed as much at system reform as anything else (with a couple of "hot button" fixes). That's boring stuff, but it seems that the legislation is aimed at "the disease, not the symptoms". That's usually a good thing, but not flashy. If it works as planned, the system becomes more efficient and more responsive, which lowers future costs with better outcomes.

From what I gathered on "Power and Politics", most of what is in the legislation is a result of "bottom up" input, so there is a very decent chance it will work.