INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

The jury decision must be made by at least two-thirds of its members.

SECTION WORDING

745.63(7) The decision of the jury under paragraph (6)(a) or (b) must be made by not less than two thirds of its members.

EXPLANATION

Section 745.63(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that governs the decision-making process in capital punishment cases. In Canada, capital punishment is only permitted for certain specific offenses, such as high treason and murder. In such cases, the death penalty may be imposed as a possible sentence, although it is rarely used, and only after a highly complex and lengthy judicial process. According to this provision, the decision on whether to impose the death penalty in a given case is made by a jury composed of twelve individuals. Specifically, the jury must reach a decision based on either of two possible pathways, as specified in subsections (6)(a) and (6)(b). To make a decision based on either of these pathways, the verdict must be reached by a two-third majority of the twelve jurors. This provision is designed to ensure that any decision to impose the death penalty is made only after careful and deliberate consideration by a majority of the jurors. The requirement for a two-thirds majority ensures that any verdict in favor of imposing the death penalty is a strong consensus decision, rather than a mere plurality vote. This in turn helps to ensure that the imposition of the death penalty is seen as legitimate, rather than a radical or arbitrary decision. Overall, section 745.63(7) is part of a complex set of legal provisions that govern the use of capital punishment in Canada. Along with other safeguards and procedural requirements, this provision helps to ensure that any decision to impose the death penalty is made in a fair, reasonable, and well-informed manner, by a majority of jurors who have carefully considered all the relevant evidence and arguments.

COMMENTARY

Section 745.63(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada forms a crucial part of Canada's legal system as it deals with the decision-making process of the jury. This section requires that any decision made by the jury regarding the imposition of the death penalty must be carried out by not less than two thirds of the members. This legal provision is an essential safeguard against any biased judgments that may lead to the wrongful conviction of an individual. Capital punishment is a severe and irreversible punishment, and as such, its use is highly controversial globally. There is a growing concern among supporters of human rights that capital punishment violates the dignity and sanctity of human life. Canada abolished capital punishment in 1976, and since then, the principles governing jury decisions have been imperative. The enactment of Section 745.63(7) was formulated to strengthen the jury's decision-making process when faced with the option of imposing the death penalty. The legal provision requiring the decision of not less than two-thirds of the jury members is vital in ensuring that the verdict of the jury reflects the opinion of the majority of its members. The unanimity of the jury decision must be taken, but a non-unanimous decision permits minority views and reduces the likelihood of wrongful convictions. The need for unanimity implies that it is essential to have a higher standard of proof that would avoid wrongful convictions. Therefore, at least two-thirds of the jury members must agree on a verdict, imposing a huge burden on the prosecution and the defense teams, ensuring the verdict is sound and legally acceptable. Another significant advantage of Section 745.63(7) is that it provides a legal framework for juror decision-making that is free from bias or prejudice. A verdict should be informed by the evidence presented in court and not influenced by other extraneous factors. Jury members must remain impartial and base their decision on the information provided in court, which should be weighed objectively and impartially. The requirement of a two-thirds vote ensures that the verdict is reached via a process where each jury member considers the presented evidence equally, thus reducing the chances of arbitrary decision-making. However, there are different opinions on the efficacy of Section 745.63(7), with some arguing that the provision is not ideal, given that it is subjective in nature and does not always guarantee a just verdict. Critics claim that it is still possible for a two-thirds majority of the jury members to convict an innocent person, depending solely on the opinion of a few well-entrenched jurors. Therefore, the legal provision's workability relies on the trust that the jury members would remain impartial during the decision-making process, and that is not always the case. In conclusion, Section 745.63(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada remains a critical safeguard against wrongful convictions, particularly in capital cases. The requirement of a two-thirds majority verdict ensures that the decision-making process is rigorous and impartial, free from any prejudice or partiality. However, it is crucial to remain vigilant and ensure that this provision is upheld to the highest standards of fairness and justice. At the end of the day, justice must be done not only through the laws but also through the actions of the justice system that upholds these laws.

STRATEGY

When it comes to dealing with section 745.63(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada, strategic considerations are crucial. The section requires that decisions made by a jury must be supported by not less than two thirds of its members. This requirement has significant implications for defendants facing charges that carry the possibility of a life sentence. Below are some of the strategic considerations that defendants and their lawyers need to be aware of when dealing with this section. 1. Building a strong case: Since a decision in favour of a defendant must be supported by a two-thirds majority, it is essential to have a solid case that can convince the jury. This may require extensive preparation, including gathering evidence, interviewing witnesses, and developing effective arguments that can sway jury members. The more robust the defense team's case is, the more likely they are to secure a favorable decision. 2. Understanding jury demographics: The composition of a jury can have a significant impact on the verdict. For instance, if a defendant is facing charges for a crime that is perceived as particularly heinous, the jury may be more inclined to vote against them. It is essential to understand the demographics of the jury and tailor the defense accordingly. A jury composed of young people, for example, may be more likely to support a defendant who is closer to their age. 3. Jury selection: The process of selecting jurors can be critical in securing a favorable decision. Defense teams should carefully review the potential jurors' backgrounds, beliefs, and experiences to identify potential biases. They can then challenge these jurors during the selection process to ensure a fair jury. Defense lawyers can also consider retaining the services of a jury consultant to help guide the selection process. 4. Appeals and mistrial options: If a defendant does not receive a two-thirds majority verdict, they may be entitled to appeal the decision. Alternatively, if it is discovered that there was misconduct or bias on the part of a juror, a mistrial may be declared. These options should be considered as part of a defense strategy. 5. Identifying and neutralizing potential objections: To secure a two-thirds majority, defense teams must be aware of potential objections and negative reactions to their case. They should identify and address these potential issues early on in the trial, before they can escalate and influence the jury's decision adversely. In conclusion, understanding the strategic considerations surrounding section 745.63(7) of the Criminal Code of Canada can be crucial in securing a favorable verdict for defendants. A strong case, understanding the jury's demographics, careful jury selection, appeals and mistrial options, and identifying and neutralizing potential objections are all essential components that defense lawyers should consider when navigating this section. By weighing these issues and developing a comprehensive defense strategy, defendants can be well-positioned to achieve the best possible outcome.