INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section allows the court to exercise its functions under sub-section 3 in chambers.
SECTION WORDING
732.2(4) All the functions of the court under subsection (3) may be exercised in chambers.
EXPLANATION
Section 732.2(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that allows the courts to exercise their functions in chambers when dealing with issues related to sentencing and release. Specifically, this section refers to subsection (3) of the same provision, which outlines the conditions for granting an offender bail or releasing them from custody. In practical terms, this provision means that the court can make decisions regarding sentencing and release in a private setting, rather than in open court. This can be beneficial in situations where sensitive information needs to be shared, such as medical records or personal information that the offender may not want to be made public. In addition, it can provide a more efficient way of making decisions, as it can avoid the need for lengthy court proceedings. However, it is important to note that this provision does not override the right to a fair trial or due process. The accused still has the right to be present and to have their lawyer present during any proceedings, and the court must still follow proper legal procedures and principles when making decisions. Overall, Section 732.2(4) is a provision that provides flexibility and efficiency in the criminal justice system without compromising the rights of the accused. It allows the court to make important decisions in a private setting, balancing the need for privacy and efficiency with the principles of fairness and due process.
COMMENTARY
Section 732.2(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that gives the court the power to exercise all its functions in chambers, particularly with regard to the suspension of a sentence or the imposition of conditions that must be complied with by the offender. This provision was introduced as part of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1996, which sought to reform the criminal justice system by simplifying and streamlining the sentencing process. The purpose of this provision is to enable the court to deal with certain aspects of the sentencing process in a less formal and more efficient manner. By allowing the court to exercise its functions in chambers, it reduces the need for a formal court hearing, which can be time-consuming and expensive. Instead, the court can make its decision based on the evidence presented to it and issue an order that will have the same force and effect as if it had been made in open court. One of the key functions of the court under subsection (3) is to suspend a sentence and impose conditions that must be complied with by the offender. This is known as a conditional sentence order, and it is typically used in cases where the offender has committed a non-violent offense and poses a low risk of reoffending. Under this provision, the court can exercise its functions in chambers and issue a conditional sentence order without the need for a formal court hearing. This can be particularly useful in cases where the offender has already pled guilty to the offense and there is no dispute as to the facts of the case. Another function of the court under subsection (3) is to vary or cancel a conditional sentence order. This is typically done when the offender has breached the conditions of the order or has committed a new offense while under the order. Again, the court can exercise its functions in chambers and issue an order varying or cancelling the conditional sentence without the need for a formal court hearing. It is important to note that while the court has the power to exercise its functions in chambers under this provision, it must still follow the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness. This means that the offender must be given notice of the proceedings and an opportunity to be heard before any decision is made that affects their rights or interests. The court must also consider any evidence or submissions presented by the parties before making a decision. In conclusion, section 732.2(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a useful provision that allows the court to exercise its functions in chambers in certain circumstances. This can help to simplify and streamline the sentencing process, particularly in cases where there is no dispute as to the facts of the case. However, it is important to ensure that the principles of natural justice and procedural fairness are followed, and that the offender is given notice and an opportunity to be heard before any decision is made.
STRATEGY
Section 732.2(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the provision that all the functions of the court under subsection (3) may be exercised in chambers. Subsection (3) of this section outlines the process for granting a discharge to a person who has been found guilty of a criminal offense. The discharge can be either an absolute discharge or a conditional discharge. An absolute discharge releases the person from all legal consequences of the offense, while a conditional discharge requires the person to comply with certain conditions for a specified period. When dealing with this section of the Criminal Code, strategic considerations come into play. The following are some strategic considerations that should be kept in mind when dealing with this section: Understand the Law As a lawyer, it is essential to have a thorough understanding of the law and processes regarding discharge and chambers. A lawyer must be up-to-date with the latest amendments and case law developments. This understanding will better equip the lawyer to offer competent advice and representation to their clients. Identify the Best Approach The chambers procedure can be beneficial for clients as it is usually less adversarial and time-consuming than a trial. However, it is important to consider whether pursuing a discharge in chambers is the best approach for the case. A lawyer may decide to pursue a discharge in chambers where the client has already accepted responsibility for the offense, and the facts of the case are not in dispute. Consider the Nature and Severity of the Offense The nature and severity of the offense play a crucial role in deciding whether to pursue a discharge in chambers or a trial. A discharge in chambers may be appropriate for less severe or non-violent offenses. For more severe offenses, a trial may be necessary as the court may need to hear from witnesses or assess the evidence before making a decision. Develop a Solid Defense Strategy A lawyer must develop a solid defense strategy when pursuing a discharge in chambers. This strategy should be well thought out and based on strong legal arguments. The lawyer must also be well prepared to present the case and respond to any questions or challenges from the judge. Advocate for the Client As an advocate for the client, a criminal defense lawyer should always be committed to protecting their client's interests. When pursuing a discharge in chambers, this commitment is crucial in ensuring that the client receives the fairest possible outcome. Some strategies that could be employed when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code are: Negotiation Negotiating with the Crown Prosecutor may be an effective strategy when pursuing a discharge in chambers. A lawyer can negotiate with the Crown Prosecutor to ensure that the best possible outcome is achieved for the client. Alternative Dispute Resolution Alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, such as mediation or arbitration, may be utilized to reduce the risks of a trial. These mechanisms are less formal, over a shorter period, and cost less compared to a trial. Conclusion In conclusion, Section 732.2(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada can be helpful when pursuing a discharge in chambers. Strategic considerations such as understanding the law, identifying the best approach, considering the nature and severity of the offense, developing a solid defense strategy, and advocating for the client can lead to a successful outcome. Employing strategies such as negotiation and alternative dispute resolution can also contribute to the success of the case. Ultimately, seeking legal advice from an experienced criminal defense lawyer remains the most effective approach when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code.