Bill C-60: An Act to amend the Criminal Code (citizen's arrest and the defences of property and persons)

C-60 Third Session, Fortieth Parliament, 59-60 Elizabeth II, 2010-2011 HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA BILL C-60 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (citizen’s arrest and the defences of property and persons) first reading, February 17, 2011 MINISTER OF JUSTICE 90593 SUMMARY This enactment amends the Criminal Code to enable a person who owns or has lawful possession of property, or persons authorized by them, to arrest within a reasonable time a person whom they find committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property. It also amends the Criminal Code to simplify the provisions relating to the defences of property and persons. Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the following address:http://www.parl.gc.ca .vis1 {position: absolute;display:block;} .vis2 {position: static;} 3rd Session, 40th Parliament, 59-60 Elizabeth II, 2010-2011 house of commons of canada BILL C-60 An Act to amend the Criminal Code (citizen’s arrest and the defences of property and persons) Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows: SHORT TITLE Short title 1. This Act may be cited as the Citizen’s Arrest and Self-defence Act. R.S., c. C-46 CRIMINAL CODE 1992, c. 1, s. 60 (Sch. I, s. 20)(F) 2. Sections 34 to 42 of the Criminal Code are replaced by the following: Explanatory NotesCriminal Code Clause 2: Existing text of sections 34 to 42: 34. (1) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted without having provoked the assault is justified in repelling force by force if the force he uses is not intended to cause death or grievous bodily harm and is no more than is necessary to enable him to defend himself. (2) Every one who is unlawfully assaulted and who causes death or grievous bodily harm in repelling the assault is justified if (a) he causes it under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence with which the assault was originally made or with which the assailant pursues his purposes; and (b) he believes, on reasonable grounds, that he cannot otherwise preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm. 35. Every one who has without justification assaulted another but did not commence the assault with intent to cause death or grievous bodily harm, or has without justification provoked an assault on himself by another, may justify the use of force subsequent to the assault if (a) he uses the force (i) under reasonable apprehension of death or grievous bodily harm from the violence of the person whom he has assaulted or provoked, and (ii) in the belief, on reasonable grounds, that it is necessary in order to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm; (b) he did not, at any time before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose, endeavour to cause death or grievous bodily harm; and (c) he declined further conflict and quitted or retreated from it as far as it was feasible to do so before the necessity of preserving himself from death or grievous bodily harm arose. 36. Provocation includes, for the purposes of sections 34 and 35, provocation by blows, words or gestures. 37. (1) Every one is justified in using force to defend himself or any one under his protection from assault, if he uses no more force than is necessary to prevent the assault or the repetition of it. (2) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to justify the wilful infliction of any hurt or mischief that is excessive, having regard to the nature of the assault that the force used was intended to prevent. Defence of Property 38. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, and every one lawfully assisting him, is justified (a) in preventing a trespasser from taking it, or (b) in taking it from a trespasser who has taken it, if he does not strike or cause bodily harm to the trespasser. (2) Where a person who is in peaceable possession of personal property lays hands on it, a trespasser who persists in attempting to keep it or take it from him or from any one lawfully assisting him shall be deemed to commit an assault without justification or provocation. 39. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property under a claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected from criminal responsibility for defending that possession, even against a person entitled by law to possession of it, if he uses no more force than is necessary. (2) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, but does not claim it as of right or does not act under the authority of a person who claims it as of right, is not justified or protected from criminal responsibility for defending his possession against a person who is entitled by law to possession of it. 40. Every one who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house, and every one lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority, is justified in using as much force as is necessary to prevent any person from forcibly breaking into or forcibly entering the dwelling-house without lawful authority. 41. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property, and every one lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority, is justified in using force to prevent any person from trespassing on the dwelling-house or real property, or to remove a trespasser therefrom, if he uses no more force than is necessary. (2) A trespasser who resists an attempt by a person who is in peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property, or a person lawfully assisting him or acting under his authority to prevent his entry or to remove him, shall be deemed to commit an assault without justification or provocation. 42. (1) Every one is justified in peaceably entering a dwelling-house or real property by day to take possession of it if he, or a person under whose authority he acts, is lawfully entitled to possession of it. (2) Where a person (a) not having peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property under a claim of right, or (b) not acting under the authority of a person who has peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property under a claim of right, assaults a person who is lawfully entitled to possession of it and who is entering it peaceably by day to take possession of it, for the purpose of preventing him from entering, the assault shall be deemed to be without justification or provocation. (3) Where a person (a) having peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property under a claim of right, or (b) acting under the authority of a person who has peaceable possession of a dwelling-house or real property under a claim of right, assaults any person who is lawfully entitled to possession of it and who is entering it peaceably by day to take possession of it, for the purpose of preventing him from entering, the assault shall be deemed to be provoked by the person who is entering. Notes explicativesCode criminel Article 2 : Texte des articles 34 à 42 : 34. (1) Toute personne illégalement attaquée sans provocation de sa part est fondée à employer la force qui est nécessaire pour repousser l’attaque si, en ce faisant, elle n’a pas l’intention de causer la mort ni des lésions corporelles graves. (2) Quiconque est illégalement attaqué et cause la mort ou une lésion corporelle grave en repoussant l’attaque est justifié si : a) d’une part, il la cause parce qu’il a des motifs raisonnables pour appréhender que la mort ou quelque lésion corporelle grave ne résulte de la violence avec laquelle l’attaque a en premier lieu été faite, ou avec laquelle l’assaillant poursuit son dessein; b) d’autre part, il croit, pour des motifs raisonnables, qu’il ne peut pas autrement se soustraire à la mort ou à des lésions corporelles graves. 35. Quiconque a, sans justification, attaqué un autre, mais n’a pas commencé l’attaque dans l’intention de causer la mort ou des lésions corporelles graves, ou a, sans justification, provoqué sur lui-même une attaque de la part d’un autre, peut justifier l’emploi de la force subséquemment à l’attaque si, à la fois : a) il en fait usage : (i) d’une part, parce qu’il a des motifs raisonnables d’appréhender que la mort ou des lésions corporelles graves ne résultent de la violence de la personne qu’il a attaquée ou provoquée, (ii) d’autre part, parce qu’il croit, pour des motifs raisonnables, que la force est nécessaire en vue de se soustraire lui-même à la mort ou à des lésions corporelles graves; b) il n’a, à aucun moment avant qu’ait surgi la nécessité de se soustraire à la mort ou à des lésions corporelles graves, tenté de causer la mort ou des lésions corporelles graves; c) il a refusé de continuer le combat, l’a abandonné ou s’en est retiré autant qu’il lui était possible de le faire avant qu’ait surgi la nécessité de se soustraire à la mort ou à des lésions corporelles graves. 36. La provocation comprend, pour l’application des articles 34 et 35, celle faite par des coups, des paroles ou des gestes. 37. (1) Toute personne est fondée à employer la force pour se défendre d’une attaque, ou pour en défendre toute personne placée sous sa protection, si elle n’a recours qu’à la force nécessaire pour prévenir l’attaque ou sa répétition. (2) Le présent article n’a pas pour effet de justifier le fait d’infliger volontairement un mal ou dommage qui est excessif, eu égard à la nature de l’attaque que la force employée avait pour but de prévenir. Défense des biens 38. (1) Quiconque est en paisible possession de biens meubles, comme toute personne lui prêtant légalement main-forte, est fondé : a) soit à empêcher un intrus de les prendre; b) soit à les reprendre à l’intrus, s’il ne le frappe pas ou ne lui inflige aucune lésion corporelle. (2) Lorsqu’une personne en possession paisible d’un bien meuble s’empare de ce bien, un intrus qui persiste à vouloir le garder ou à le lui enlever, ou à l’enlever à quiconque prête légalement main-forte à cette personne, est réputé commettre une attaque sans justification ni provocation. 39. (1) Quiconque est en possession paisible d’un bien meuble en vertu d’un droit invoqué, de même que celui qui agit sous son autorité, est à l’abri de toute responsabilité pénale en défendant cette possession, même contre une personne qui légalement a droit à la possession du bien en question, s’il n’emploie que la force nécessaire. (2) Quiconque est en possession paisible d’un bien meuble, mais ne le réclame pas de droit ou n’agit pas sous l’autorité de quiconque prétend y avoir droit, n’est ni justifié ni à l’abri de responsabilité pénale s’il défend sa possession contre une personne qui a légalement droit à la possession de ce bien. 40. Quiconque est en possession paisible d’une maison d’habitation, comme celui qui lui prête légalement main-forte ou agit sous son autorité, est fondé à employer la force nécessaire pour empêcher qui que ce soit d’accomplir une effraction ou de s’introduire de force dans la maison d’habitation sans autorisation légitime. 41. (1) Quiconque est en possession paisible d’une maison d’habitation ou d’un bien immeuble, comme celui qui lui prête légalement main-forte ou agit sous son autorité, est fondé à employer la force pour en empêcher l’intrusion par qui que ce soit, ou pour en éloigner un intrus, s’il ne fait usage que de la force nécessaire. (2) Un intrus qui résiste à une tentative, par quiconque est en possession paisible d’une maison d’habitation ou d’un bien immeuble, ou par quiconque prête légalement main-forte à cette personne ou agit sous son autorité, de l’empêcher d’entrer ou de l’éloigner, est réputé avoir commis des voies de fait sans justification ni provocation. 42. (1) Toute personne est fondée à entrer paisiblement de jour dans une maison d’habitation ou sur un bien immeuble pour en prendre possession si elle-même, ou quelqu’un sous l’autorité de qui elle agit, a légalement droit à cette possession. (2) Lorsqu’une personne qui, selon le cas : a) n’a pas la possession paisible d’une maison d’habitation ou d’un bien immeuble en vertu d’un droit invoqué; b) n’agit pas sous l’autorité d’une personne ayant la possession paisible d’une maison d’habitation ou d’un bien immeuble en vertu d’un droit invoqué, se porte à des voies de fait contre quiconque, ayant légalement droit à la possession de cette maison ou de ce bien, y entre paisiblement de jour pour en prendre possession, afin de l’empêcher d’entrer, les voies de fait sont réputées sans justification ni provocation. (3) Lorsqu’une personne qui, selon le cas : a) est en possession paisible d’une maison d’habitation ou d’un bien immeuble en vertu d’un droit invoqué; b) agit sous l’autorité d’une personne ayant la possession paisible d’une maison d’habitation ou d’un bien immeuble en vertu d’un droit invoqué, se porte à des voies de fait contre une personne qui a légalement droit à la possession de cette maison ou de ce bien et qui y entre paisiblement de jour pour en prendre possession, afin de l’empêcher d’entrer, les voies de fait sont réputées provoquées par la personne qui entre. Defence — use or threat of force 34. (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if (a) they believe on reasonable grounds that force is being used against them or another person or that a threat of force is being made against them or another person; (b) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of defending or protecting themselves or the other person from that use or threat of force; and (c) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances. Factors (2) In determining whether the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances, the court may consider, among other factors, (a) the nature of the force or threat; (b) the extent to which the use of force was imminent and whether there were other means available to respond to the potential use of force; (c) the person’s role in the incident; (d) whether any party to the incident used or threatened to use a weapon; (e) the size, age and gender of the parties to the incident; (f) the nature, duration and history of any relationship between the parties to the incident, including any prior use or threat of force and the nature of that force or threat; (g) the nature and proportionality of the person’s response to the use or threat of force; and (h) whether the act committed was in response to a use or threat of force that the person knew was lawful. No defence (3) Subsection (1) does not apply if the force is used or threatened by another person for the purpose of doing something that they are required or authorized by law to do in the administration or enforcement of the law, unless the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence believes on reasonable grounds that the other person is acting unlawfully. Defence of Property Defence – property 35. (1) A person is not guilty of an offence if (a) they either believe on reasonable grounds that they are in peaceable possession of property or are acting under the authority of, or lawfully assisting, a person whom they believe on reasonable grounds is in peaceable possession of property; (b) they believe on reasonable grounds that another person (i) is about to enter, is entering or has entered the property without being entitled by law to do so, (ii) is about to take the property, is doing so or has just done so, or (iii) is about to damage or destroy the property, or make it inoperative, or is doing so; (c) the act that constitutes the offence is committed for the purpose of (i) preventing the other person from entering the property, or removing that person from the property, or (ii) preventing the other person from taking, damaging or destroying the property or from making it inoperative, or retaking the property from that person; and (d) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances. No defence (2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence does not have a claim of right to the property and the other person is entitled to its possession by law. No defence (3) Subsection (1) does not apply if the other person is doing something that they are required or authorized by law to do in the administration or enforcement of the law, unless the person who commits the act that constitutes the offence believes on reasonable grounds that the other person is acting unlawfully. 3. (1) Subsection 494(2) of the Act is replaced by the following: Clause 3: (1) Existing text of subsection 494(2): (2) Any one who is (a) the owner or a person in lawful possession of property, or (b) a person authorized by the owner or by a person in lawful possession of property, may arrest without warrant a person whom he finds committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property. Article 3 : (1) Texte du paragraphe 494(2) : (2) Quiconque est, selon le cas : a) le propriétaire ou une personne en possession légitime d’un bien; b) une personne autorisée par le propriétaire ou par une personne en possession légitime d’un bien, peut arrêter sans mandat une personne qu’il trouve en train de commettre une infraction criminelle sur ou concernant ce bien. Arrest by owner, etc., of property (2) The owner or a person in lawful possession of property, or a person authorized by the owner or by a person in lawful possession of property, may arrest a person without a warrant if they find them committing a criminal offence on or in relation to that property and (a) they make the arrest at that time; or (b) they make the arrest within a reasonable time after the offence is committed and they believe on reasonable grounds that it is not feasible in the circumstances for a peace officer to make the arrest. (2) Section 494 of the Act is amended by adding the following after subsection (3): (2) New. (2) Nouveau. For greater certainty (4) For greater certainty, a person who is authorized to make an arrest under this section is a person who is authorized by law to do so for the purposes of section 25. COMING INTO FORCE Order in council 4. The provisions of this Act come into force on a day or days to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council. Published under authority of the Speaker of the House of CommonsAvailable from:Publishing and Depository ServicesPublic Works and Government Services Canada