Thank you.

Good morning.

I'm hoping that someone could provide me a copy of that motion, because I don't have the BQ motions. I gather it relates to section 650 of the code, but if I could have a copy, that would help.

I think I understand. To me, this looks like a consequential amendment to another substantive amendment that will come later, and specifically to remove reference to certain proposed sections in the bill.

If I understand correctly, the concern relates to the remote appearance provision, meaning this clause and clause 46 of the bill, and maybe I can start with some general information.

The first thing I would point out to the committee is that clause 45 of the bill re-enacts a provision that already exists in the Criminal Code—or would re-enact a provision that already exists in the Criminal Code—which states the principle that as a general matter, proceedings would be done in person. That's the starting point. Then, what clause 46 proposes to do is to consolidate and clarify a bunch of different rules that already exist in the Criminal Code with respect to remote appearances.

In effect, when I say “consolidate”, there are provisions, for example, as in clause 39, in section 650 of the Criminal Code. There are provisions in other clauses of the bill that are being opened, such as section 537 of the Criminal Code and section 800 of the Criminal Code, that all deal with the rules around remote appearances. Bill S-4 doesn't propose to change those rules, so to the extent that an individual can appear by video conference, Bill S-4 doesn't propose to change that.

If I understand as well the concern around proposed section 715.241 with the requirement of an accused to appear in in a situation where there isn't consent provided, that is simply a re-enactment of existing rules. It doesn't change the law in that respect.

The goal here is really to ensure that if an individual in custody is going to appear in a proceeding, the court ensures they have access to legal advice before they do so.

I know that's a lot of different pieces of information, but I think the main point to convey is that Bill S-4 really seeks to consolidate and clarify existing laws around remote appearances.

Transcript

Discussions (0)