Canadian Courts and Social Control

Courts, Law, and Social Control

• Canadian courts resolve disputes by reconciling competing interests and enforcing social control.
• According to sociologist Donald Black, rehabilitation is NOT a style of social control used by courts.

Canadian Courts: Essential Characteristics

• Canada's adversarial system is characterized by truth emerging from a contest between two opposing arguments.
• A weakness of the adversarial system is that wealthier parties can afford better legal representation.
• The adversarial system relies on competing arguments, while the inquisitorial system relies on judges to seek the truth.

Structure of Canada’s Court System

• The Supreme Court of Canada would most likely handle a dispute between the federal and provincial governments.
• The Youth Criminal Justice Act allows judges to exclude the public from youth court proceedings when necessary.

Standards of Proof in Trials

• The standard of proof in a criminal trial is beyond a reasonable doubt.
• In criminal trials, the burden of proof is on the prosecution, while in civil trials, it is on the plaintiff.

Contemporary Issues with the Courts

• Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin highlighted trial delays and the erosion of the right to be tried within a reasonable time as a major issue facing Canada’s court system.
• The primary goal of restorative justice is to promote reconciliation between the victim, offender, and community.

Emerging Models of Conflict Resolution

• Mediation in a family law dispute is an example of alternative dispute resolution.
• A key advantage of mediation over traditional courtroom litigation is that it is faster and less costly.

Open Access to the Courts

• A judge can exclude the public from a courtroom when it is in the interest of public morals, order, or the proper administration of justice.
• Banning the publication of youth offenders’ names is done to reduce stigma and allow young offenders to rehabilitate.

The Formality of the Courts

• The formality of Canadian courts may alienate individuals who do not share the educational or cultural background of the judiciary.
• Maintaining formality in Canadian courts creates an atmosphere of dignity and decorum, enhancing the court’s prestige.
• Indigenous people in Canadian courts often feel like bystanders rather than participants in the legal process.

Structure of Canada’s Court System

• Provincial Court has absolute jurisdiction over theft under $5,000.
• The primary function of the Small Claims Division of provincial courts is to adjudicate minor civil matters, typically involving small financial disputes.
• Murder would most likely be heard in a superior court.
• The Supreme Court of Canada serves as the final court of appeal for significant legal issues.

The Milgaard Case and Wrongful Convictions

• The key issue in the Milgaard case was whether Milgaard’s wrongful conviction could be overturned based on new evidence.
• The Supreme Court used the balance of probabilities standard of proof to evaluate Milgaard’s claim of innocence.
• The outcome of the Milgaard case after the Supreme Court review was that Milgaard was granted a new trial, but the province decided not to proceed.
• DNA evidence exonerated Milgaard and implicated Larry Fisher.
• The Milgaard inquiry recommended creating an independent body to review allegations of wrongful convictions.

Contemporary Issues in the Court System

• One systemic issue highlighted by the Milgaard case is the fallibility of the justice system and the need for mechanisms to address wrongful convictions.
• Section 690 (now 696.1) of the Criminal Code allows the minister of justice to order a new trial or hearing in cases of wrongful conviction.
• One lesson learned from the Milgaard case about the justice system is that the system must have mechanisms to address and correct wrongful convictions.

Wrongful Convictions and the Role of Science

• DNA testing has exonerated innocent people and exposed flaws in the justice system in wrongful conviction cases.
• Key lesson is that the system is fragile and fallible, requiring mechanisms to correct errors.
• The fallibility of the justice system is particularly concerning because it's better to let a guilty person go free than to execute an innocent one

Juries and Their Role in the Justice System

• Section 11(f) of the Charter guarantees the right to a jury trial for offences punishable by more than five years’ imprisonment.
• Legal scholars criticize the jury system because the jury lack the legal expertise to understand complex cases.
• One argument in favor of the jury system is that juries apply community standards of fairness and equity.
• In the Gerald Stanley trial in 2018, Stanley was acquitted by a jury with no visibly Indigenous members.
• Bill C-75 abolished peremptory challenges in the jury selection process in Canada.
• One concern about the abolition of peremptory challenges is that it may make it harder for racialized defendants to exclude biased jurors.

Courtroom Delays and the Right to a Timely Trial

• Section 11(b) of the Charter guarantees the right to be tried within a reasonable time.
• A consequence of courtroom delays in Canada is uncertainty and prolonged stress for accused individuals and victims.
• A factor contributing to courtroom delays in Canada is the lack of resources, such as judges and courtrooms.

Broader Implications of Jury Decisions

• An example of a jury applying community values in a criminal case is a jury acquitting a woman who shot her abusive husband.
• One concern about juries applying community values in their decisions is that juries may reinforce biases such as racism or sexism.
• A difference between Canadian and U.S. jury systems is that Canadian jurors are prohibited from discussing deliberations after a trial.