NCJ Number
106259
Date Published
1986
Length
18 pages
Annotation
This Canadian report proposes legislation that distinguishes three types of fault in provincial offenses and specifies defenses to provincial offenses.
Abstract
The proposed act defines an intentional offense as one in which the prosecution must prove intention by the accused. It indicates that an intentional offense is created when a statute prohibits a person from engaging in conduct knowingly, intentionally, maliciously, willfully, or without lawful excuse, or otherwise expressly includes intention as an element of the offense. An absolute liability offense is defined by the proposed act as one which does not require the prosecution to prove intention or negligence. The act indicates that absolute liability does not apply unless an enactment so provides. The proposed act defines a strict liability offense as one in which the prosecution is not required to prove intention or negligence, but the accused may be acquitted if the defense establishes that the accused exercised reasonable care to avoid or prevent the occurrence of the offense or believed in facts which if correct would not have constituted an offense. Any offense not specified as an intentional or absolute liability offense is governed by strict liability. Regarding defenses, the act proposes that every rule or principle of the common law or Criminal Code provision that renders any circumstance a justification for an act or omission or a defense to an offense is available to anyone charged with a provincial offense, except where this is inconsistent with law. 88 footnotes.