Criminal Inadmissibility If you have committed or have been convicted of committing a crime, you may not be allowed into Canada. Part 1, Division 4, section 36, of the Refugee and Immigration Protection Act addresses criminal inadmissibility for immigration to Canada.. Criminal inadmissibility does not mean you have no chance of gaining entry into Canada, there are situations where criminal admissibility may be overcome or appealed. Understanding the legal requirements, the legal application, ways to overcome criminal inadmissibility and exploring relevant cases can help to navigate the situation and give applicants a chance to enter Canada. The golden rule for criminal inadmissibility is that the offence must be criminal in both the country the offence was committed and in Canada. Section 36 divides criminality into two categories; ‘serious criminality (subsection 1) and criminality (subsection 2). Serious criminality is an act or conviction that must be equated to an offence punishable in Canada and must also hold a term of imprisonment in Canada for a maximum of at least ten years and a minimum of six months. Criminality is having been convicted or having had committed an offence punishable in Canada as an indictable offence, or having committed or convicted of any two offences, not from a single occurrence, that would constitute as offences in an Act of Parliament. This also include committing an offence upon entering Canada. This division of offences is relative to
All trial procedures in Canada are based on the adversarial system, this involves both the Crown and the defence. In our case R.v. Tisi since we were the Crown it was our job to prove beyond a reasonable doubt (doubt based on reason and common sense) that the accused committed the offence. For someone to be convicted, actus reus (wrongful deed) and mens rea (guilty mind) to be present for the offence to be proven. In R.v.Tisi, Donovan Tisi was charged with robbery and assault causing bodily harm resulting in a summary conviction. In the Criminal Code, assault causing bodily harm is under section 267(a) is defined as “Everyone who in, committing an assault, (a) carries, uses or threatens to use a weapon or an imitation thereof, or” Tisi was
Canada has many rules in place for all the crimes that happens throughout the country. However, people of different ages are treated differently. This is because of the YCJA, which gives youth who commit crime, under the age of eighteen, certain rights that adult criminals don’t get. This is a very debated and important topic because this act gives certain advantages to youth criminals because of their age and some people don’t think that this is fair.
v. Gladue, came the Supreme Court decision that restorative justice is extremely crucial to the justice system in Canada, and that s. 718.2(e) of the Criminal Code applies to Gladue even though she lives off-reserve, because the larger problem present is the disproportionate number of Aboriginals in jail. However, they also say that restorative justice isn’t the only thing that needs to be considered when sentencing aboriginals, and that some crimes are serious enough to deserve traditional punishment and sentencing. In addition, the Supreme Court Judges say that allowing a new trial solely on the basis of her aboriginal status would not be in the public
This paper will be focusing on the controversial issue of mandatory minimum sentences in Canada. There has been much debate over this topic, as it has quickly become implemented for the sentencing of drug offenders, drug-related crimes and banned firearm offences. I will argue that every case that comes through the criminal justice system is different and deserves a fair trial with a sentence that is not already determined for them. There have been many cases where the judge has no discretion in the sentence due to the mandatory minimum sentences pre-determined for the case, no matter what the aggravating or mitigating factors were. I will argue that the mandatory minimum sentences in Canada should be reduced or eliminated as
Since the British North America Act was adopted in 1867, Canada has been developing and writing up their own laws independently from other countries. Many people believe that, though our Canadian laws have come far from the days of the BNA act, they are still not up to par with the harshness of American laws. The advantage that Canadians have over Americans is that in Canada, there is only one criminal code for all Canadians whereas in the United States, every State has their own criminal codes which, unfortunately for the Americans, are not identical. Also, the United States and Canada each have a law that is fraught with the possibility that an injustice will be brought upon those whom these laws apply. In the United States, it is the
Canadian Criminals are a major part of Canadian society. In our country if you were not the direct victim of a crime you tend to forget the members of society that take pleasure in causing societies grief. As in the case of James Hutchinson and Richard Ambrose, whose crimes were committed in December of 1974.1 They were convicted of killing two Moncton City Police officers. Today, years after the murders were committed Ambrose and Hutchinson are still the center of a major controversy that has plagued our parole system. In order to fully understand the controversy that Ambrose and Hutchinson posses you must look at the
The Criminal Justice System has many components that make it up. There are many differences and similarities between Canada and America like the culture, religion, and governments. Some of the main differences and similarities being the Criminal Justice System. The Criminal Justice System is the law that is related to arresting, sentencing and punishing people if found guilty with jail time, probation, or community service. In this research paper, I will be stating some of the main differences and similarities between the Canadian and American Judicial System.
Wrongful conviction is an issue that has plagued the Canadian Justice System since it came to be. It is an issue that is hard to sort out between horrific crimes and society’s desire to find truth and justice. Incidences of wrongful conviction hit close to home right here in Saskatchewan as well as across the entire nation. Experts claim “each miscarriage of justice, however, deals a blow to society’s confidence in the legal justice system” (Schmalleger, Volk, 2014, 131). Professionals in the criminal justice field such as police, forensic analyst, and prosecutors must all be held accountable for their implications in wrongful convictions. There are several reasons for wrongful convictions such as racial bias, false confessions, jailhouse
A closer in depth analysis into Canada’s justice system will show that their acceptance of all cultures did not leak through to the confinements of its courts. Why it is that one race or class is more likely to be an inmate? From a racial standpoint,
In today’s Canadian society, it is certain that criminal law is to serve and protect and its fundamental purpose is to prevent crime and punish offenders. However, there have been cases where criminal law has punished the offender who turned out to be innocent. A conviction is needed to show that the system is not in disrepute and to keep order and people safe in society. If a criminal cannot be caught then people will look down upon the system in disgrace. In many cases, officers will arrest an individual who fits a certain description that they know will lead to an arrest and conviction. In the case of Guy Paul Morin it shows how the system failed in aiding the innocent who abide to the law. The law is established to protect those who
The Canadian Criminal Justice System is, for the most part, reflective of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and various Supreme Court of Canada case-law. Everyone who finds themselves on the opposing end of the Criminal Justice System is entitled to certain protections every step of the way, beginning even before the arrest; laws protect us from unreasonable investigative techniques, guarantee certain rights at point of arrest, and provide us with the right to counsel. The bail court departs from the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ standard in that the crown only needs to prove on a balance of probabilities (Kellough, 1996, p. 175) in order to take away a person’s freedom. It is for this reason I decided to limit the scope of my
The Canadian criminal justice system consists of multiple roles in order to sustain a well-working government system. The system is put in place in order to keep safety, equality, peace and fairness. There are four main functions of the criminal justice system that are interrelated segments that help protect a society from crime. The criminal justice system consists of policing, courts, corrections and parole. The component of the Canadian Criminal Justice System that will be discussed is about the process and function of the courts.
Some People argue that ‘’criminal behaviour in violation of the criminal law is not a crime unless its prohibited by the criminal Law’’ (Sutherland & Cressey (1924/1970 in John Muncie pp4).The criminal Law is a set of specific rules that regard human behaviour which has been publicized by the political power, which applies equally to all the members of the population. No matter how moral, dangerous or damaging it is to the society it is not a crime unless the authorities, the government have made it a law. This is quite dangerous because offenders might commit crimes which are not likely to break the law and might not be classified as crime. This article by Taipan argues that ‘’only those who are criminals have been adjudicated as such by the courts’’ (Tappan, 1947, in John Muncie p.100).Some circumstances must be meet an act before it can be classified as crime these are
The Canadian criminal justice system is often represented by the balanced scales of justice. These scales symbolize the need for the law to be viewed objectively in order to ensure a fair determination of innocence. Ideally, the criminal justice system should incorporate the values of the scales of justice to control crime and impose penalties on those who violate the law (Jordan, 2014). When dealing with crime, this system mainly uses methods of retributive justice in order to achieve its goals. However, despite justice being supposedly impartial, there is an overwhelming amount of injustice in all stages of the criminal justice process, from the charging of the individuals in court to their sentence in prison (Jordan, 2014). To combat this
Throughout the history of Canada, we have acknowledged Indigenous cultures as being the first people of Canadian land. However, society has not treated them as equal members of society since the first explorers settled. The Euro-Canadian culture has impacted the Indigenous people negatively; as a result injustice between the two cultures has developed and inequality has widened as the two cultures interact more frequently. Lisa Monchalin (2016), author of the text The Colonial Problem: An Indigenous Perspective on Crime and Injustice in Canada, noted multiple reasons how Aboriginal people are discriminated against in society, and how they are over-represented in Canadian correctional system. In society, according to Aylsworth, L., and Trovato, F. (2012) of The Canadian Encyclopedia, the indigenous population was approximately 4.3% of the total Canadian population, yet, the 2015-2016 Annual Report of the Office of the Correctional Investigator noted “an unabated increase in the number of Indigenous people behind bars, a rate now surpassing 25% of the total federal incarcerated population” (2016, n.p.). This raised the question as to why there was such a blatant over-representation of Indigenous people in the criminal justice system. Indigenous history has been speckled with injustices, hardship, discrimination, racism, and have been on the receiving end of multiple attempts to rid Canada of Indigenous ways and people. The history of these