Conclusion
Author | Kent Roach |
Pages | 546-571 |
546
CHAPTER 12
CONCLUSION
The criminal law in Canada has undergone significant changes. The
most visible change has been the enactment of the Canadian Charter
of Rights and Freedoms. As examined in Chapter 2, the Charter causes
criminal courts to be concerned not only with the accused’s factual
guilt, but also with whether the police and prosecutors complied with
the accused’s legal rights in the investigative and trial process. Non-
compliance with Charter rights can lead to the exclusion of relevant
evidence. Entrapment that would bring the administration of justice
into disrepute can result in a stay of proceedings even though the ac-
cused may have committed the crime with the required mens rea.
The Charter guarantees the presumption of innocence. It has been
interpreted to be breached whenever the accused bears the burden of
establishing an element of an offence, a defence, or a collateral factor.
It can even be breached when the accused must satisfy an evidential
burden to overcome a mandatory presumption. It is not breached, how-
ever, when a judge makes a preliminary deci sion about whether there is
an air of reality to justify putting a defence to a jury. The Charter con-
tains many procedural rights such as the right against unreasonable
search and seizure that affect the investigation of crime and disclosure
and speedy trial rights that affect the trial process.
In addition, the Charter has provided new substantive standards
of fairness by which to measure criminal and regulatory offences and
the availability of defences. Constructive murder has been struck
down as inconsistent with the minimum mens rea for murder and
Conclusion 547
absolute liability offences have been found to be unconstitutional when
they result in imprisonment. The intoxication and duress defences have
also been expanded in response to Charter concerns. The Charter has
influenced both the procedure and the subst ance of the criminal process.
More recently, the Supreme Court has struck down offences relating
to prostitution and assisted suicide on the basis that the principles of
fundamental justice in section 7 of the Charter are breached by laws
that are overbroad by infr inging rights further th an required to achieve
their objective or laws that are grossly disproportionate. In both cases,
Parliament responded with controversial new laws prohibiting the pur-
chase of sex and limiting the right to assistance in dying. The dia-
logue between courts and Parliament that started under the common
law continues under the Charter, albeit subject to the requirements of
the reasonable limits provisions in section 1 of the Charter with Parlia-
ment’s final option (not yet exercised) of enacting criminal laws not-
withstanding Charter rights.
Although some of the effects of the Charter on the criminal law
have been dramatic and unexpected, the overall effect can be over-
stated, particularly in relation to substantive criminal law, which has
been the focus of this work.
Most cases in which the broad presumption of innocence has been
violated have nevertheless bee n sustained under section 1 of the Charter
as reasonable and proportionate limits on Charter rights. The Supreme
Court has approved the pre-Charter compromise of strict liability for
regulatory offences, including the requirement that the accused rebut
a presumption of negligence by establishing a defence of due diligence.
The courts have also found that no-fault absolute liability offences will
not violate section 7 of the Charter if they do not result in imprison-
ment. With the exception of the limited defence of officially induced
error, the Court has accepted the sometimes h arsh consequences of the
traditional principle that even reasonable ignorance or a mistake of the
law is not an excuse. The Court has even violated the presumption of
innocence itself by requiring the accused to establish the defences of
extreme intoxication, non-mental disorder automatism, and officially in-
duced error on a balance of probabilities. The Court itself has restricted
the provocation defence that if successful reduces murder to manslaugh-
ter and, in 2015, Parliament also restricted this defence in a manner that
is likely to attract Charter challenge, as have the restrictions that Parlia-
ment placed on the defence of extreme intoxication in 1995.
The Charter has in some respects protected fault principles less ro-
bustly than the common law. Before the Charter, the courts under the
common law applied common law presumptions of subjective fault in
To continue reading
Request your trialUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
