INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Non-compliance with an order made under subsection (1) is a punishable offense on summary conviction.
SECTION WORDING
539(3) Every one who fails to comply with an order made pursuant to subsection (1) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
EXPLANATION
Section 539(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada imposes an obligation to comply with orders made pursuant to subsection (1) and makes noncompliance a criminal offense punishable on summary conviction. Subsection (1), in turn, empowers a court to order the forfeiture of property that was used in committing or was proceeds of a crime. This provision serves as a powerful tool for law enforcement to disrupt criminal operations, deter future criminal activity, and compensate victims or the state. However, the exercise of forfeiture power is not without controversy and requires careful balancing of competing interests, including property rights, due process, and proportionality. Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure, which extends to property interests. Therefore, to order forfeiture, the court must first find that the property is related to an offense, and that the forfeiture is not grossly disproportionate to the gravity of the offense. The court must also give notice to affected parties and provide an opportunity to be heard. If the court issues a forfeiture order, the recipient of the order must comply with it by surrendering the property, paying an equivalent amount if cash is ordered forfeited, or otherwise complying with the terms of the order. Failure to comply with the order amounts to a criminal offense, which is punishable on summary conviction. The penalty for such an offense is typically a fine, imprisonment, or both. In summary, section 539(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada underscores the importance of complying with forfeiture orders made pursuant to section 539(1), and serves as a deterrent to noncompliance. However, it also highlights the need for the court to exercise the forfeiture power judiciously and with due regard to the rights and interests of all parties involved.
COMMENTARY
Section 539(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada states that any individual failing to comply with an order made pursuant to subsection (1) is guilty of an offence, punishable on summary conviction. This provision of the Code serves as an important legal protection against individuals who are ordered to comply with specific legal directives but fail to do so, thereby impeding the administration of justice and potentially causing harm to others. Subsection (1) of Section 539 allows for a variety of court orders to be issued, including orders for the production of documents or objects and orders for the arrest, detention, or release of an accused person. These orders are essential for the proper functioning of our justice system, as they allow for the gathering and presentation of evidence and the maintenance of public safety. The consequence for failure to comply with an order made pursuant to subsection (1) is a summary conviction offense, which carries a maximum penalty of six months in jail or a $5,000 fine, or both. This provides a significant deterrent for individuals who may be tempted to ignore or disobey court orders. More broadly, this provision reflects the importance of respecting and adhering to legal directives. The justice system relies on timely and accurate compliance with orders to function effectively. When individuals flout these orders, they are not only undermining the authority of the court but also jeopardizing public safety and potentially creating further legal issues. It is worth noting that this provision of the Criminal Code is not intended to be used as a means of punishing individuals who are unable to comply with court orders due to circumstances beyond their control. Instead, it is primarily directed towards those who willfully disregard legal directives. As such, it is essential that courts consider the specific circumstances of each case when determining whether an individual has failed to comply with an order. In conclusion, Section 539(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada serves as an important legal safeguard against individuals who fail to comply with court orders. By providing for summary conviction offenses for non-compliance, this provision reinforces the importance of adhering to legal directives and ensures the proper functioning of our justice system. As a result, it constitutes a key tool in upholding the integrity and authority of the legal system.
STRATEGY
Section 539(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that deals with the penalty for failure to comply with an order made pursuant to subsection (1) of the same section. Subsection (1) allows a court to make an order for the restoration of property or the payment of money, among other things. Failure to comply with such an order is a criminal offense that can attract a fine or imprisonment. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are several strategic considerations that come to mind. These may include: 1. Complying with the order - The best way to avoid being charged with an offense under this provision is to comply with the court order. This means following the instructions given by the court and making the necessary payments or restitution as ordered. 2. Seeking legal advice - If complying with the order is not possible or desirable, seeking legal advice from an experienced criminal lawyer may be a good idea. The lawyer can advise on the best course of action, including any potential defenses that may be available. 3. Negotiating with the complainant - In some cases, it may be possible to negotiate with the complainant and come to a mutually acceptable resolution. This could involve proposing a payment plan or making alternative arrangements that are acceptable to both parties. 4. Proving inability to comply - In some cases, individuals may be unable to comply with a court order due to financial or other constraints. In such situations, it may be possible to provide evidence of this inability to the court and seek a modification of the order or an extension of time to comply. 5. Appealing the order - If the order is believed to be unjust or unreasonable, it may be possible to appeal it to a higher court. However, this should only be done after seeking legal advice and considering the potential risks and rewards of an appeal. In terms of strategies that could be employed when dealing with section 539(3), some options may include: 1. Preparing a plan - If an individual is unable to comply with a court order, developing a detailed plan that outlines how they intend to meet their obligations can be helpful. This plan should be presented to the court or complainant to demonstrate a good-faith effort to comply. 2. Seeking a variation - If complying with the order is not possible, seeking a variation of the order may be an option. This could involve proposing alternative ways to satisfy the complainant's claim, such as offering to perform community service or providing other goods or services in lieu of payment. 3. Demonstrating hardship - If complying with the order would cause undue hardship, it may be possible to demonstrate this to the court and seek a modification of the order. This could involve providing evidence of financial or personal hardship, such as medical bills or other expenses that are making it difficult to comply. 4. Negotiating with the prosecutor - In some cases, it may be possible to negotiate with the prosecutor and come to a plea agreement that avoids a criminal record or reduces the severity of the penalty. In conclusion, section 539(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada can be a serious offense with potential consequences for those who fail to comply with a court order. However, there are several strategic considerations and strategies that can be employed to avoid or mitigate these consequences. Seeking legal advice, complying with the order, negotiating with the complainant or prosecutor, preparing a plan, seeking a variation, and demonstrating hardship are all potential strategies that may be effective in different situations. Ultimately, the best approach will depend on the specific circumstances of each case and should be determined after careful consideration of all the relevant factors.