INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
Violation of an order made under this section is an indictable offence and may lead to imprisonment for up to five years.
SECTION WORDING
70(3) Every one who contravenes an order made under this section is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
EXPLANATION
Section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that applies to cases where an individual has been subjected to a peace bond or recognizance. These are court orders that require a person to refrain from certain activities or behaviors that could potentially harm others. If an individual fails to comply with the terms of a peace bond or recognizance, they can be charged under section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada. This provision makes it an indictable offense, which means that it is a serious criminal offense that can result in imprisonment for up to five years. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that individuals who have been ordered to refrain from certain activities do not continue to engage in those activities. If an individual is found to have violated the terms of their peace bond or recognizance, they can be charged and face serious consequences. It is important to note that section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada only applies to cases where a person has been ordered to enter a peace bond or recognizance. It is not a general provision that applies to all criminal offenses. Overall, section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that helps to ensure public safety by ensuring compliance with court orders. It serves as a deterrent to individuals who may be inclined to violate a peace bond or recognizance and provides a means of holding them accountable if they do.
COMMENTARY
Section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the offence of violating an order made under this section. This section empowers the court to impose certain conditions on an offender while granting their release on bail or probation. The conditions may include a requirement to stay away from certain individuals or places, a curfew, or a restriction on the possession of firearms or other dangerous weapons. The purpose of imposing such conditions is to ensure the safety of the public and individuals who may be at risk of harm by the offender. It is also intended to prevent the offender from fleeing justice or interfering with ongoing investigations. Violating any of these conditions would be a serious offence that could lead to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years if the offender is found guilty. The offence of violating an order made under this section is an indictable offence, which means that it is a serious criminal offence that can result in a trial by jury. The maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment reflects the seriousness of the offence and the need to deter offenders from disobeying court orders. The actual sentence imposed would depend on the circumstances of the case, including the nature of the violation and the offender's criminal record. One of the challenges of enforcing this section of the Criminal Code is that it relies on the offender's compliance with the court order. If an offender violates a condition, the authorities must first become aware of the violation before they can take action. This often means relying on other individuals or witnesses to report the violation to the police or probation officer. Another challenge is that violators may not be deterred by the threat of imprisonment, especially if they are desperate or have little regard for the law. In such cases, the authorities may need to take more aggressive measures, such as surveillance or electronic monitoring, to ensure compliance with the court order. In conclusion, Section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada serves an important role in ensuring the safety of the public and victims of crime. Violating an order made under this section is a serious offence that can result in imprisonment. While this section is an important legal tool for protecting the public, its effectiveness depends on compliance by the offender and the ability of authorities to enforce it.
STRATEGY
Section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada confers judicial powers to the court to issue orders to any person who is found to have breached any provisions of the code. The section allows the court to issue various types of orders, including prohibiting the accused from performing certain activities or ordering the accused to comply with certain conditions. The penalties for non-compliance with these orders are severe, as individuals can be charged with an indictable offence and face imprisonment for up to five years. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code of Canada, lawyers and defendants must consider several strategic factors to ensure the best outcome of their cases. Some of the considerations include the nature of the offence, the nature of the order issued by the court, and the accused's criminal history. These factors have a significant influence on the course of action one can employ to defend the accused or reduce their exposure to criminal liability. One of the key strategic considerations when dealing with section 70(3) is the nature of the offence. Different types of crimes carry different levels of severity, and this affects the nature of the orders issued by the court. If the offence committed was minor, such as a breach of a peace bond, the court may issue an order that prohibits the accused from contacting the victim or require them to attend counselling sessions. However, if the offence is severe, such as committing a serious violent crime, the orders issued will be more restrictive as the accused is considered a danger to society. Another strategic consideration when dealing with section 70(3) is the nature of the orders issued by the court. Orders can be restrictive or non-restrictive. Restrictive orders prohibit the accused from engaging in certain activities that may be deemed harmful, while non-restrictive orders require the accused to comply with certain conditions. Lawyers can strategically challenge the orders issued if they are unreasonable or do not serve the intended purpose. For instance, if the court issues an order that prohibits the accused from visiting a particular area without a valid reason, the lawyer can argue that the order is unreasonable, and it infringes on the accused's freedom of movement. The accused's criminal history also plays a significant role in the strategic considerations when dealing with section 70(3). Previous criminal charges or convictions may affect the outcome of the case. If the accused has a criminal history of breaching orders, it may lead to more severe penalties, including longer prison sentences. A lawyer can strategically argue that the accused is unlikely to breach the order issued, based on their past behaviours and compliance history. Several strategies can be employed when dealing with section 70(3). These strategies include negotiating with the Crown, challenging the order issued, and seeking alternative dispositions. Lawyers can negotiate with the Crown for a lesser charge or sentence based on the accused's circumstances or request a variation of the order issued. If the order is challenged, the accused can seek a review of the order, argue for its modification or revocation. Finally, an alternative disposition such as diversion programs or community service can be proposed to the Crown or Court. In conclusion, Section 70(3) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a rigorous framework that empowers the court to issue orders to the offenders. Lawyers and defendants must consider various strategic factors when dealing with this section to ensure the best outcome for their clients. These strategic considerations are driven by the nature of the offence, the nature of the order, and the accused's criminal history. Employing the right strategies such as negotiating, challenging orders, or seeking alternative treatments is crucial in achieving successful outcomes.
CATEGORIES