BACKGROUNDER

The Government is proposing a number of sentencing and corrections reforms that build upon current criminal and correctional laws.

Several measures would extend controls over persons convicted of sex crimes and other violent offences. These measures aim to reduce the risk that persons previously convicted of sex offences and other violent offences commit further crimes. They also address public concerns about violent and sexual offenders.

Dangerous Offenders

The Dangerous Offender provisions in the Criminal Code have proven to be a useful mechanism for sentencing serious offenders who pose a high risk of committing further violent offences. Through a special hearing, such offenders may be given an indeterminate sentence. Dangerous Offender applications have been used successfully in approximately 150 cases. The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld this process as a valid form of sentencing.

It is proposed that the Criminal Code be amended to make a number of improvements, without undermining the central components of the process or interfering with the rights of the offender to offer a full defence.

Under the current law, a judge has the discretion to sentence a dangerous offender to a fixed term. The Federal-Provincial-Territorial Task Force on High-Risk Violent Offenders, which reported to Ministers responsible for Justice in January 1995, suggested that it makes little sense to go through the elaborate Dangerous Offender procedure, only to obtain a definite sentence comparable to what might have been obtained without this procedure. Provinces have expressed support for this change.

Under the proposed changes, the judge will no longer have the discretion, and will be required to impose an indefinite sentence.

Currently, a Dangerous Offender application must be made at trial. The Crown will now have up to six months after conviction to bring in a Dangerous Offender application.

This provision would apply only if the Crown gives notice at the time of conviction of the possibility of a delayed application, and new, relevant information also emerges to support the application.

Furthermore, the process has been streamlined. The number of psychiatrists required to testify at a hearing has been changed from two to one.

An amendment stating that a risk assessment of the convicted person would be done before the Crown makes a Dangerous Offender or Long-Term Offender application is also included.

It is proposed that the initial parole review of a Dangerous Offender be moved from the third year of imprisonment to the seventh year. This brings the initial review by the National Parole Board closer to parole eligibility calculations for many serious personal injury offences. Subsequent reviews would occur every two years, as provided in the current law.

Long-Term Offenders

It is proposed that a new sentencing category, to be called Long-Term Offender, be added to the Criminal Code. The procedure would be similar to the process for Dangerous Offenders.

The Long-Term Offender procedure will apply to persons convicted of sexual assault, sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching, sexual exploitation, exposure, aggravated sexual assault and sexual assault with a weapon or causing bodily harm. It could also be applied to a person who committed another offence that had a sexual component; for example, somebody who committed a break and enter with a clear intention of sexually assaulting the occupant.

Under the proposal, a convicted person found, at a special hearing, to be a Long-Term Offender would be subject to a prison sentence suited to the offence, with an additional period of supervision for up to 10 years.

The test for Long-Term Offender would also entail a judgment that the risk presented by the offender could eventually be managed in the community through appropriate long-term supervision. This supervision would be undertaken by the Correctional S ervice of Canada.

A person who cannot be found to meet the narrow definition of a Dangerous Offender could be found to be a Long-Term Offender, provided the criteria were met.

Judicial Restraint

It is proposed that a new judicial restraint provision be added to the Criminal Code. This procedure would focus on persons who pose a risk of committing a serious personal injury offence.

The Attorney General could bring an application where, in his or her view, there were reasonable grounds to fear that an individual would commit a serious personal injury offence. These grounds would be examined at a hearing before a judge.

As one of the conditions, the judge could order that a program of electronic monitoring be applied, if such a program were available in the province.

The judicial restraint would last up to one year. A breach of conditions would constitute a separate criminal offence.