The amendment of the Criminal Code proposed by the conservative leader Pierre Poilievre to strengthen the legal protections for Canadians who defend their homes would not offer any real benefit, experts in criminal law say.
Their demands come to the light of a 44 -year -old man from Lindsay, Ontario, be accused for allegedly attacking an intruder at home. On Friday, Pailievre pounced at the time to suggest amending the Criminal Code so that the use of force against a person who enters a home illegally and represents a threat to those inside, is presumed reasonable.
But criminal law experts say that the Canadian law already favors housing owners in cases of invasion of the house, so Pailievre’s idea does nothing to improve their protection against criminal charges.
Noah Weisbord, a law professor at McGill University who specializes in cases involving the use of self -defense, said the responsibility is in prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the force used against an intruder was disproportionate.
Section 34 of the Criminal Code It provides the framework for self -defense and defense of others.
According to that law, Canadians are not guilty of a crime if they believe for reasonable reasons that the force (or the threat of force) is being used against them or another person.
Your defense act must also be with the purpose of defending or protecting itself and being reasonable in circumstances.
When the crown evaluates a reasonable perspective of condemnation, it considers evidence, as physical evidence and testimony.
Therefore, says Weisbord, the crown that pursues a case against an owner who confronts an intruder suggests that the prosecution has evidence to argue that the force used under the circumstances may not have been in self -defense.
“There is evidence that we do not know, about what the owner did in that altercation that makes the crown think it was an excessive force, or it was not a reasonable force,” he said.
The changes could put the public in more danger: lawyer
The criminal defense lawyer, Kim Schofield, said that the amendment proposed by Pailievre “does not clarify or make things simpler” and that he could put the public more danger.
“The presumption of reasonableness is a very dangerous and slippery slope,” said Schofield. “What happens if someone makes a mistake and if the house invader is not really an invader?”
Schofield says that just because someone comes to his door, “he has no right to commit a violent act inherently, and we have to act reasonably, and that is, I think, what allows the Criminal Code.”
The leader of the Canada Conservative Party, Pierre Poilievre, speaking of Brampton, Ontario, on Friday announced the proposed principle of ‘Stand on Guard’. The proposed amendment would clarify the provisions of the Criminal Code regarding the use of force and self -defense when someone enters a home illegally and threatens people inside.
When determining if the act of defense is “reasonable”, the courts consider nine factors, including the nature of the threat, the physical capabilities of the parties involved, the history of the parties and if any part used or threatened to use weapons.
Pailievre argued that Canadians who are defending their homes “do not have time to think about nine conditions,” calling the wrong to apply “a complicated and indecipherable legal doctrine when I was only doing the right thing.”
But Schofield emphasized that people who face demanding circumstances are not expected to consider these factors.
“They are simply guidelines for judges at the end of the day, they are in fact,” he said.
The law can put marginalized communities at risk
Weisbord warned against the adoption of laws such as Florida’s Stand Your Ground Statute, which provides legal immunity to the people who “find strength with force, including mortal force“By acting in self -defense.
“Every time you do that, in any jurisdiction, suddenly, all these minorities and marginalized people begin to receive a shot by aggressors with firearms and property defenders,” he said.
In 2017, a group of researchers published an evaluation of the Stand Your Ground Law of Florida and discovered that it was linked to a remarkable increase in homicides and homicide by firearm between 2005 and 2014.
The implementation of said law in Canada could disproportionately affect marginalized communities, said Weisbord, citing the case of Saskatchewan farmer Gerald Stanley.
In 2018, A jury acquitted Stanley In the fatal shooting of Colten Boushie, a man believes 22 years of Red Phesant First Nation, after he and four others led Stanley’s farm in Biggar, Sask.
Weisbord says that he is also worried that a support of the law of his land can lead to violent people who claim that they fear for their lives when their main intention was to attack someone more vulnerable.
“They are often violent criminals … that they are basically just trying to get out of the hook after being aggressive, it often succeeds,” he said.
