Blackman v. Review Board (B.C.) et al., (1995) 54 B.C.A.C. 170 (CA)

• Judge: Carrothers, Hutcheon and Taylor, JJ.A.
• Court: Court of Appeal (British Columbia)
• Case Date: January 24, 1995
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (1995), 54 B.C.A.C. 170 (CA)

Blackman v. Review Bd. (1995), 54 B.C.A.C. 170 (CA);

    88 W.A.C. 170

MLB headnote and full text

Bruce Alfred Blackman (petitioner/appellant) v. British Columbia Review Board, The Attorney General of British Columbia, The Attorney General of Canada, CKNW Radio and The Vancouver Sun (respondents/respondents)

(CA017480)

Indexed As: Blackman v. Review Board (B.C.) et al.

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Carrothers, Hutcheon and Taylor, JJ.A.

January 24, 1995.

Summary:

Blackman was found not guilty of murder by reason of insanity. His status was reviewed annually by a Board established under Part XX.I of the Criminal Code. Blackman sought a declaration that s. 672.5(6) of the Code, which authorized the exclusion of members of the public (includ­ing the media) from the review hearing only when this was "not contrary to the public interest", violated his rights under ss. 7 and 15 of the Charter. The trial judge dismissed the application. Blackman appealed.

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal.

Civil Rights - Topic 659

Liberty - Limitations on - Committal of insane accused - Review hearings - Ex­clusion of public - Section 672.5(6) of the Criminal Code authorized the exclusion of the public from a hearing reviewing the status of those found not guilty of offences by reason of insanity, only when this was "not contrary to the public interest" - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that to submit such persons to the presence of the media at such hearings would not deprive those persons of their liberty or security of the person contrary to s. 7 of the Charter - See paragraphs 58 to 64.

Civil Rights - Topic 1133

Discrimination - Criminal and quasi-criminal law - Committal of insane accused - Review hearings - Exclusion of public - Section 672.5(6) of the Criminal Code authorized the exclusion of the pub­lic from a hearing reviewing the status of those found not guilty of offences by reason of insanity, only when this was "not contrary to the public interest" - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that by this process the mentally ill under Part XX.I of the Code were not discrimi­nated against, when compared to inmates seeking parole or young offenders, con­trary to s. 15 of the Charter - See para­graphs 47 to 57.

Civil Rights - Topic 1369

Security of the person - Institutional inmates - Committal of insane accused - Review hearings - Exclusion of public - Section 672.5(6) of the Criminal Code authorized the exclusion of the public from a hearing reviewing the status of those found not guilty of offences by reason of insanity, only when this was "not contrary to the public interest" - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that to submit such persons to the presence of the media at such hearings would not deprive those persons of their liberty or security of the person contrary to s. 7 of the Charter - See paragraphs 58 to 64.

Civil Rights - Topic 1800

Freedom of speech or expression - Gen­eral principles - General - The British Columbia Court of Appeal, per Taylor, J.A., stated that "I find it far from clear that s. 2(b) (of the Charter) - which guar­antees to everyone the freedoms of 'thought, belief, opinion and expression' - can be said also to guarantee a 'freedom of information' or 'right to know'" - See paragraph 42.

Civil Rights - Topic 2001

Freedom of thought, belief or opinion - General - [See Civil Rights - Topic 1800 ].

Civil Rights - Topic 8547

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Interpretation - Particular phrases - Principles of fundamental justice - Section 672.5(6) of the Criminal Code authorized the exclusion of the public from a hearing reviewing the status of those found not guilty of offences by reason of insanity, only when this was "not contrary to the public interest" - The British Columbia Court of Appeal held that the phrase "not contrary to the public interest" did not create a test so vague as to render its application contrary to the "principles of fundamental justice" in s. 7 of the Charter - See paragraph 65.

Criminal Law - Topic 93.81

General principles - Mental disorder - Dispositions by review Board - Consider­ations - Section 672.5(6) of the Criminal Code authorized the exclusion of the pub­lic from a hearing reviewing the status of those found not guilty of offences by reason of insanity, only when this was "not contrary to the public interest" - The British Columbia Court of Appeal stated that the review Board regarded consider­ations relevant to the "best interests of the accused" as relevant also in assessing the "public interest", and that recovery or rehabilitation was included among them - See paragraph 24.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Swain, [1991] 1 S.C.R. 933; 125 N.R. 1; 47 O.A.C. 81; 63 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 14].

Edmonton Journal v. Alberta (Attorney General), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1326; 102 N.R. 321; 103 A.R. 321; [1990] 1 W.W.R. 577; 64 D.L.R.(4th) 577; 71 Alta. L.R.(2d) 273; 45 C.R.R. 1, consd. [para. 31].

Davidson v. British Columbia (Attorney General) et al. (1987), 87 C.C.C.(3d) 269 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 35].

Saumur v. Quebec (City), [1953] 2 S.C.R. 299, refd to. [para. 40].

Southam Inc. et al. v. Coulter, J. et al. (1990), 40 O.A.C. 341; 60 C.C.C.(3d) 267 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 42].

Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. New Brunswick (Attorney General) (1994), 148 N.B.R.(2d) 161; 378 A.P.R. 161, refd to. [para. 42].

Arnold v. King-Emperor, The (1914), 83 L.J.P.C. 299, refd to. [para. 43].

Globe and Mail v. Boland, [1960] S.C.R. 203, refd to. [para. 43].

McConachy v. Times Publishers Ltd. (1964), 50 W.W.R.(N.S.) 389 (B.C.C.A.), refd to. [para. 43].

Chernesky v. Armadale Publishers Ltd. and King, [1979] 1 S.C.R. 1067; 24 N.R. 271, refd to. [para. 43].

Pierre v. Pacific Press Ltd. et al. (1993), 32 B.C.A.C. 193; 53 W.A.C. 193; 83 B.C.L.R.(2d) 1 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 44].

R. v. Morales (M.), [1992] 3 S.C.R. 711; 144 N.R. 176; 51 Q.A.C. 161; 77 C.C.C.(3d) 91, refd to. [para. 65].

R. v. Farinacci (L.W.) et al. (1993), 67 O.A.C. 197; 86 C.C.C.(3d) 32 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 65].

Statutes Noticed:

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, 1982, sect. 1 [paras. 28-29, 68]; sect. 2(b) [paras. 9, 32, 42, 44]; sect. 7 [paras. 3, 8, 28-29, 58, 60, 63-65]; sect. 15 [paras. 3, 8, 35]; sect. 15(1) [paras. 28-29, 47-48, 54, 57]; sect. 26 [para. 42].

Corrections and Conditional Release Act, S.C. 1992, c. C-20, generally [para. 29]; sect. 140(4) [paras. 49-50]; sect. 140(5) [para. 49].

Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, Part XX.I [paras. 1, 6, 10, 14, 35-37, 44-45, 48, 50, 54, 57, 69]; sect. 672 [para. 6]; sect. 672.5(6) [paras. 3, 8-9, 20-21, 27-28, 44, 49-52, 60, 64-65, 68]; sect. 672.51, sect. 672.54 [para. 34]; sect. 672.72(1) [para. 16].

Young Offenders Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. Y-1, generally [para. 29]; sect. 39 [para. 52].

Authors and Works Noticed:

Dicey, A.V., Introduction to the Law of the Constitution (10th Ed.), p. 247 to 250 [para. 43].

Counsel:

Frances Kelly, for the appellant;

Angela Westmacott, for the Attorney General of British Columbia;

Murray Rankin, for the British Columbia Review Board;

Daniel Burnett, for CKNW Radio;

Barry Gibson, for the Vancouver Sun.

This appeal was heard in Vancouver, British Columbia, on September 13 to 15, 1994 before Carrothers, Hutcheon and Tay­lor, JJ.A., of the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The decision of the court was delivered by Taylor, J.A., on January 24, 1995.