INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
If convicted of an offence related to an instrument or device, it may be ordered forfeited to the government in addition to other punishments.
SECTION WORDING
342.2(2) Where a person is convicted of an offence under subsection (1), any instrument or device, in relation to which the offence was committed or the possession of which constituted the offence, may, in addition to any other punishment that may be imposed, be ordered forfeited to Her Majesty, whereupon it may be disposed of as the Attorney General directs.
EXPLANATION
Section 342.2(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada allows for the forfeiture of any instrument or device used or possessed in relation to an offence committed under subsection (1). Subsection (1) pertains to the offence of breaking and entering a place with intent to commit an indictable offence. This provision ensures that the government can effectively confiscate instruments or devices that were used in the commission of a crime and prevent their future use in illegal activities. It also serves as a deterrent to those who may be tempted to use certain tools, such as lock-picking tools or a crowbar, to commit a criminal offence. The forfeiture of the instrument or device can be ordered as a separate punishment alongside any other penalties incurred by the offender. The forfeited property then becomes the property of the government and can be disposed of as directed by the Attorney General. In essence, this provision aims to disrupt the criminal activity by removing the tools or devices used in carrying out the offence and helps to prevent the continuation of the crime. Additionally, it sends a strong message that the government is serious about cracking down on criminal activities and that offenders will not only be punished but that their tools will also be forfeited.
COMMENTARY
Section 342.2(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides for the forfeiture of any instrument or device used in the commission of an offence under subsection (1) of the same section. This provision is aimed at deterring the use of such instruments or devices in criminal activities, as well as ensuring that those who are found guilty of committing such offences are punished appropriately. The provision applies to a variety of instruments or devices, including those that are used to make counterfeit currency, credit cards, or other financial instruments; those that are used to forge identification documents or other official papers; and those that are used in the commission of fraud or other financial crimes. The purpose of the forfeiture provision is to remove from circulation any instruments or devices that are used in the commission of criminal activities. This is important because it helps to prevent such instruments or devices from being used in future criminal activities, and also helps to prevent their use in other types of criminal activities. For example, a person who is found guilty of counterfeiting currency may have their equipment seized and forfeited to prevent them from using it to commit similar offences in the future. Another important aspect of this provision is that it allows for the disposal of any forfeited instruments or devices as directed by the Attorney General. This ensures that these items are disposed of in a safe and timely manner, and that they do not pose a threat to public safety or security. There are some potential concerns that may arise with the use of forfeiture provisions in criminal law. One such concern is that the provision may be used too broadly, resulting in the forfeiture of instruments or devices that are not directly related to the commission of the offence in question. This could lead to innocent individuals or businesses having their property seized and forfeited, which could be unfair and unjust. To mitigate this risk, it is important that forfeiture provisions are applied strictly and that only those instruments or devices that are clearly related to the offence in question are forfeited. It is also important that individuals or businesses whose property is seized and forfeited have access to a fair and transparent process for challenging the forfeiture. In conclusion, section 342.2(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides an important tool for deterring the use of instruments or devices in criminal activities and ensuring that those who are found guilty of committing such offences are appropriately punished. However, it is important to ensure that forfeiture provisions are applied fairly and justly to prevent innocent individuals or businesses from having their property seized and forfeited.
STRATEGY
Section 342.2(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the court with the power to order the forfeiture of instruments or devices that were used in the commission of an offence under subsection (1). This provision gives law enforcement agencies an important tool to combat criminal activities such as theft, fraud, and other related offenses. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, there are several strategic considerations that law enforcement agencies should keep in mind. Firstly, the decision to seek a forfeiture order should be carefully considered. It is important to assess the value of the instrument or device in relation to the potential fines and other penalties that may be imposed. Additionally, the potential impact of the forfeiture on the individual or entity that owns the instrument or device should also be considered. Secondly, the timing of the forfeiture order should also be carefully considered. It is important to ensure that the instrument or device is seized as quickly as possible after the commission of the offense to prevent any attempted disposal or destruction. However, it is also important to ensure that the investigation is sufficiently advanced to establish the necessary connection between the device and the offense. Thirdly, the strategy employed in seeking a forfeiture order may vary depending on the particular circumstances of the case. For example, in cases involving organized crime, it may be more effective to seek a forfeiture order against multiple instruments or devices used in the commission of the offense rather than a single instrument or device. Additionally, in cases involving partnerships, it may be more effective to seek forfeiture orders against all partners rather than against a single individual. Fourthly, it is important to ensure that the forfeiture order is enforced effectively. This may require a coordinated effort between law enforcement agencies, customs officials, and other relevant authorities. Additionally, the value of the forfeiture order may be increased by using the device or instrument for official purposes or by selling it to a third party. Finally, law enforcement agencies should be mindful of any potential challenges to the forfeiture order. This may include challenges based on the constitutional rights of individuals or entities affected by the order. In conclusion, Section 342.2(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides law enforcement agencies with an important tool to combat criminal activities. However, it is important to carefully consider the strategic considerations listed above in order to ensure that the implementation of the provision is effective and efficient.