1 / 6

Protecting the Rights of people found NCR

Protecting the Rights of people found NCR. CHARTER RIGHTS Supreme Court of Canada in Winko , Pinet-Tulikorpi , and Mazzei Jennifer Chambers Empowerment Council Coordinatorgh. Four Guiding Pillars.

lefty
Télécharger la présentation

Protecting the Rights of people found NCR

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Protecting the Rights of people found NCR CHARTER RIGHTS Supreme Court of Canada in Winko, Pinet-Tulikorpi, and Mazzei Jennifer Chambers Empowerment Council Coordinatorgh

  2. Four Guiding Pillars Section XX.1 of the Canadian Criminal Code relates to those individuals found Not Criminally Responsible Due to Mental Disorder ( NCR ) or Unfit to Stand Trial. It is to be read in the context of the four guiding " pillars " as follows: • protection of the public from dangerous persons, • the mental state of the accused, • re-integration of the accused into society, and • the other needs of the accused. At no point in the majority decision of the SCC in Winko, has greater importance been apportioned to one or another of these " pillars ".

  3. “Dangerousness” “Dangerousness” has a specific, restricted meaning of “a significant threat to the safety of the public”. • It must be supported by the evidence. • There must be a real risk of physical or psychological harmand this harm must be serious. • The conduct or activity creating the harm must be criminal in nature.”

  4. Evidence The NCR accused does not have to prove anything. There is no presumption of dangerousness permitted by law. “If the evidence does not support the conclusion that the NCR is a significant risk, the NCR need do nothing; the only possible order is an absolute discharge.”

  5. Restriction • In all cases, the Review Board must make the disposition that is the least restrictive of the NCR accused’s liberty possible. • Winko followed by Pinet-Tulikorpi

  6. Consider Needs The Review Board has an affirmative duty “to consider the accused’s personal needs” SCC in Winko and Mazzei

More Related