NCJ Number
47055
Journal
Canadian Journal of Criminology Volume: 20 Issue: 2 Dated: (APRIL 1978) Pages: 126-141
Date Published
1978
Length
16 pages
Annotation
THE CANADIAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IS CRITICIZED FOR LACKING AN OVERALL POLICY OF LONG-RANGE GOALS SIMILAR TO A NATIONAL FOREIGN OR ECONOMIC POLICY, WHICH IS CONSTANTLY REVIEWED AND UPDATED.
Abstract
NO GOVERNMENT IN CANADA, OR PERHAPS IN THE OCCIDENTAL WORLD, HAS REVIEWED THE HISTORY OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, EVALUATED PAST EXPERIENCE, AND THEN DEVELOPED PROGRAMS DESIGNED TO MAKE FUTURE EXPERIENCE CONFORM TO KNOWN, ARTICULATED FUTURE GOALS. THE ANTIQUATED CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS INHERITED FROM PAST JUDGES AND LEGISLATIVE ADMINISTRATORS CONTINUE TO EXIST. IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT THE CANADIAN PARLIAMENT DECLARE A MORATORIUM ON ALL NEW LEGISLATIVE PROGRAMS AND THEIR ASSOCIATED ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT SYSTEMS INVOLVING CRIMINAL LAW REFORM, EXCEPT IN THE AREA OF COURT PROCEDURES AND EVIDENCE, UNTIL A NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY CAN BE FORMULATED TO GIVE DIRECTION TO FUTURE EFFORTS AT PROCEDURAL AND CODE REFORM. MODERN BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE AND THE 80-PERCENT RECIDIVISM RATE IN CANADIAN PENITENTARIES CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THE BROAD CONSENSUS AND NAIVE OPTIMISM OF THE 19TH CENTURY HAS BEEN A DISASTROUS FOUNDATION FOR THE APPROACH TO PROBLEMS OF CRIMINALITY. THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, COMPOSED OF THE POLICE, THE PENAL SYSTEM, AND THE COURTS, CAN NO LONGER IGNORE 20TH CENTURY EXPERIENCE AND INSIGHT INTO HUMAN BEHAVIOR. A POLICY THAT UPDATES THE DIRECTION AND GOALS OF THE PROCESS OF ADMINISTERING JUSTICE MUST BE FOUND. IF, IN ORDER TO HAVE A CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY, IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE A LEGISLATIVE POLICY, THEN IT IS EQUALLY IMPORTANT TO HAVE SENTENCING ATTITUDES WHICH INCORPORATE THE SAME PRINCIPLES THAT DETERMINED THE LEGISLATIVE POLICY. AS YET, THIS DOES NOT EXIST IN CANADA. WHILE PARLIAMENT IS ENGAGED IN THE RECOMMENDED FORMULATION OF A FUNDAMENTAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE POLICY, THERE IS ALSO AN URGENT NEED TO MODERNIZE THE CANADIAN TRIAL PROCESS. PRETRIAL PROCEDURES SHOULD BE IMMEDIATELY AND DRASTICALLY MODIFIED. REELECTION HEARINGS HAVE NOT PROVEN BENEFICIAL; THEY CAUSE UNCERTAINTY IN THE EFFICIENT PLANNING OF COURT ROSTERS AND ARE OFTEN USED TO OBTAIN DELAY OR ENCOURAGE 'JUDGE-SHOPPING.' THE RIGHT TO REELECTION SHOULD BE ABOLISHED OR LIMITED TO EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE ITS DENIAL WOULD BE A VIRTUAL MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR STREAMLINING CERTAIN ASPECTS OF PRETRAIL AND PRESENTENCING PROCEDURES ARE ALSO SUGGESTED. (KBL)