logo
Canada Votes: Bail reform complex issue despite campaign slogans, says criminal lawyer

Canada Votes: Bail reform complex issue despite campaign slogans, says criminal lawyer

CBC25-04-2025

Social Sharing
"Crime and lack of punishment for offenders ... 'catch and release.'"
When CBC Windsor asked about the issues on your minds this federal election, that was one answer from a Windsor West voter.
It's a sentiment shared by others. Other respondents to the survey identified "unsafe streets" and "freedom for criminals" as their biggest neighbourhood issues that will influence their vote.
"I'm not surprised it's an election issue," said Jordan Gold, principal partner of Gold Law, a criminal defence law firm based in Toronto. "It's an easy talking point."
"Not many potential voters are going to [say], 'Well, more people should be getting bail and not kept in jail.' It's very easy to get people emotional and excited about the prospect of being able to reduce crime. Everybody wants crime to be reduced."
Gold has written articles on the subject for his firm's website. Last month, he dissected Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre's public statements on bail reform — particularly the slogan "Jail, Not Bail," and Poilievre's claim that he would end "automatic bail."
"If the notion is that certain people are getting bail without a bail hearing... That is just not something that happens. There is no such thing as 'automatic bail,' and there never has been," Gold told CBC Windsor.
Provincial governments and police associations have been calling upon the federal government to re-examine and revise the bail system.
The Police Association of Ontario (PAO), the Ontario Provincial Police Association (OPPA) and the Toronto Police Association (TPA) called for reform in 2024, after officers were caught in a shooting between two groups while doing bail compliance checks.
'Effective bail reform must strike a balance between public safety and the rights of the accused," the associations said in a statement. "The public expects that in the name of public safety, violent and repeat offenders will not be released on bail unless there is a compelling reason and a sensible plan to ensure that they are not at risk of reoffending while awaiting trial."
Natalie Delia, a criminology professor at the University of Windsor, acknowledges there's a public safety concern that must be balanced against individual rights in a free society.
"Whenever you have people that aren't in jail or prison, crime of some sort is going to happen. The people that are most likely to commit those crimes happen to also be people who have been arrested for crimes," Delia told CBC Windsor.
"But that doesn't mean that we can pro-actively put them all in jail or prison — although that would 'fix' the problem."
For Delia, debate on denial of bail inevitably involves the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
"What I'm saying is completely not controversial: In order to be incarcerated, you should have been convicted of a crime, right?"
Both the Liberals and the Conservatives mention changes to the bail system in their policy platforms.
The Liberals promise they'll make bail laws stricter for violent offences and organized crime. Those charged with home invasion or human trafficking, for example, will be subject to "reverse onus" — meaning it's the responsibility of the accused to prove to the court they're not a danger to public safety.
The Conservatives promise they'll repeal Bill C-75 — the 2019 legislation that sought to "modernize and streamline" the bail system.
Meant to reflect Supreme Court of Canada decisions on Charter rights, Bill C-75 codifies a "principle of restraint" to ensure that release at the earliest opportunity is favoured over detention.
According to the Tories, this has allowed "rampant criminals" to "go free within hours of their arrest."
Other parties have varying degrees of engagement with the issue. The federal NDP does not mention bail reform in its platform. Neither does the Green Party of Canada.
Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the People's Party of Canada blamed the Liberal government's "insane woke ideology" for Bill C-75, and said the party's position is to repeal the law and replace it with "a much more stringent bail regime."
But Gold says he believes what's being lost in the slogans is the other side of the debate: That people accused of a crime are presumed innocent and have a right to due process.
The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that when you are charged, you have a right to a trial within a reasonable time, and bail courts must first consider the least restrictive options for your release.
"[People] get an opportunity to have a judge or justice of the peace decide whether it is proper to release them or detain them," Gold told CBC Windsor.
"There are robust and complex laws in place to determine who can be released on bail and who should be detained pending trial."
Gold said he's aware there are many situations where detention is needed due to the risk to the public or risk that someone will flee.
But he says the issue is nuanced, and can't be understood with simple slogans. Voters, he says, need to educate themselves on the issue and not rely on "assumptions and misconceptions."
"The notion that we can punish offenders by jailing them before we know whether they're offenders — that's not what bail is about," Gold said.
Delia says she feels it's important to recognize that the justice system was built on generations of decisions trying to be responsible and equitable.
"We have faculties of law, we have law programs, we have whole processes for sentencing and for training judges... Canada is a safe place to live," Delia said.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Letters: 'We're done being quiet' in Alberta
Letters: 'We're done being quiet' in Alberta

National Post

time3 hours ago

  • National Post

Letters: 'We're done being quiet' in Alberta

Article content This is in stark contrast to the pro-Palestinian groups that have chosen, in the spirit of Hamas, to spread hate in the world. We have watched these groups as they have become increasingly hateful, aggressive and violent. They have escalated from rallies outside of Jewish community centres and schools, to encampments on university grounds, to shootings at Jewish schools, to hunting Jews after a football match on the eve of Kristallnacht, to the murder of two innocent Israeli embassy staff. Standing next to them are the politicians who offer hollow words about antisemitism at the same time as they refuse to recognize or condemn the source of this evil. Article content Kudos to the Conservatives for pushing the Carney government (although unsuccessfully) to tender a spring budget. Obviously Prime Minister Carney thinks he has clear sailing to spend almost half a trillion dollars without telling Canadians where those billions will be going. Article content In any democracy the government is expected to inform taxpayers as to how it plans to spend their hard-earned tax dollars. Without a budget there is no real accountability or possibility for oversight. This move is a reminder for Carney, who keeps opining that voters gave him a massive mandate when in fact he has only a minority government. Article content Peter Shawn Taylor's article highlights a basic truth: when nature calls, fairness isn't optional — it's essential. But fairness means designing solutions that benefit the greatest number. Article content Gender inequality in washroom access is real. Long lines outside women's washrooms reflect a design failure rooted in outdated assumptions. But removing urinals or forcing everyone to sit doesn't fix the problem — it worsens it by increasing delays for all. Article content Instead of eliminating efficiency, we should expand it — especially as an aging population increases demand. Biological differences exist, and public infrastructure should reflect them. As in architecture, form should follow function. Article content The real issue is inadequate infrastructure for private functions in public spaces. Victorian prudishness once discouraged public washrooms; today, that legacy leaves us unprepared. Try to find easily accessible relief on the Toronto subway system. Moreover Canadians shouldn't adopt Europe's approach of charging for access. Intuition of natural law suggests that there is something wrong in demanding forced payment for nature's call. Instead, we should think and act based on utilitarianism: add urinals, increase public facilities, and open seasonal restrooms year-round. Article content Canada's $10-a-day child-care plan, legislated under Bill C-35, promised access, inclusion, and affordability — but it's clearly failing. Alberta, Ontario and Saskatchewan, holding over 73 per cent of Canada's child-care spaces outside Quebec, have refused the federal extension due to inadequate funding, soaring costs and discriminatory rules excluding private centres. Manitoba illustrates this clearly, giving raises only to educators in public or non-profit centres, leaving private educators behind simply due to business structure, not qualifications or quality. Alberta families face similar absurdities: newly licensed private centres can't access affordability grants, forcing parents into costly market-rate fees or endless waitlists.

Letters to the Editor, June 8, 2025
Letters to the Editor, June 8, 2025

Toronto Sun

time6 hours ago

  • Toronto Sun

Letters to the Editor, June 8, 2025

Sunday letters Photo by Illustration / Toronto Sun HUMAN CAPITAL This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account Re 'Carney's hocus-pocus plan to increase debt and balance the budget' (Lorrie Goldstein, May 31): In today's knowledge economy, having a fit and well-trained workforce is economically essential, so trying to distinguish between capital and operating budgets and capping the latter (i.e. vital health and education expenditures) will be dangerously counter-productive. Today our elites want spending focused on infrastructure whose benefits immediately accrue to big businesses and financial institutions. Large projects may indeed have merit, but woe to us if we neglect crucial protection of our valuable human capital. For example, a dental program may be just as all-important as physical infrastructure: Low-income students are more likely to turn into highly-skilled workers if they can study without nagging toothaches and infected gums. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Larry Kazdan Vancouver (What is important at outcomes. The Liberals have spent billions on all sorts of programs but are we seeing the benefits to the economy?) HELP FROM BIG BROTHER USA Much has been said about how well Mark Carney is standing up to current pressure from Donald Trump. In the meantime, has Canada met its 2% obligation as a NATO member or are we still 'sorta hoping our big brother will protect us' notwithstanding? Tim Conway Toronto (Canada has not met this obligation) WEAK JUSTICE Re 'Undercover cops nab 36 men in Ontario child luring probe' (Jane Stevenson, June 5): Any serious justice system must prioritize the protection of the most vulnerable members of society, that being the elderly and the young. Huge kudos to those police officers who went after these criminals who prey on young children to satisfy their depraved sexual desires. This is a very difficult job for police having to deal with such seriously perverted individuals. Unfortunately, because of the current federal Liberal no-bail, often weak sentencing by social warrior justices, in what has become a revolving door justice system it is doubtful these perpetrators will be severely punished as a deterrent to others. The children pedophiles prey upon have their lives destroyed forever! Larry Comeau Ottawa (It is appalling what has happened. Where is Canadians' outrage over this?) Olympics Columnists Toronto & GTA World Columnists

Libman: On death, taxes and the future of minority rights in Quebec
Libman: On death, taxes and the future of minority rights in Quebec

Montreal Gazette

timea day ago

  • Montreal Gazette

Libman: On death, taxes and the future of minority rights in Quebec

Benjamin Franklin famously wrote: 'In this world nothing can be certain, except death and taxes.' Section 23 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, however, comes pretty close. It is the ironclad constitutional protection of minority-language education rights in this country. It has consistently been interpreted by Quebec courts to uphold the right of the English-speaking minority to control and manage its school system. And it's exempt from the application of the notwithstanding clause. After the Coalition Avenir Québec government adopted Bill 40 in 2020, abolishing and replacing school boards with service centres under greater government control, the province's English boards challenged the law as unconstitutional. In 2023 Quebec Superior Court Judge Sylvain Lussier agreed, ruling in no uncertain terms that much of Bill 40 infringes on the English-speaking community's constitutional rights to govern and control its educational institutions. The CAQ government, however, appealed the judgment. In April of this year, Quebec Court of Appeal judges Robert Mainville, Christine Baudouin and Judith Harvie handed down their ruling. They also concluded that parts of Bill 40 infringe on the section of the Charter of Rights that guarantees minority-language education rights and couldn't be demonstrably justified as a reasonable limit on charter rights in a free and democratic society. Another slam dunk for minority education rights. Yet this week, the Legault government went ahead anyways to request leave to appeal this judgment by Quebec's highest court to the Supreme Court of Canada. The irony here shouldn't be lost: Quebec's nationalist government is asking Canada's highest court to overturn rulings from the two Quebec courts. I have little doubt Quebec's lawyers have advised the government they cannot possibly win this case at the Supreme Court. This appeal seems purely political. No one would expect the CAQ to dare show any surrender in assailing minority language rights at the risk of giving a drumstick to their more nationalist rivals, the separatist Parti Québécois. The Supreme Court should refuse to hear the appeal considering how categorically the two Quebec courts unanimously ruled in what seems an open-and-shut case. For several reasons, the ideal scenario would be for the Supreme Court to say the Quebec courts composed of Lussier, Mainville, Baudouin and Harvie have already made an irreproachable decision. Case closed. This, in fact, could even benefit the CAQ (which they might be secretly hoping for) because if the Supreme Court does take the case and inevitably invalidates sections of the law sometime next year, around Quebec election time, it would help provide ripe fodder for the PQ to condemn Canada for 'again' crushing Quebec's aspirations and ignoring its 'distinctiveness' — while conveniently glossing over the fact that Quebec francophone judges had also unanimously struck it down. But watch out for another concern. Within days of the appeal court's ruling, coincidentally or not, Quebec Justice Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette announced his intention to launch negotiations with Ottawa about amending the Constitution so that Quebec judges are chosen from among members of the Quebec Bar, recommended by the Quebec government. Currently, superior and appeal court judges are appointed by the federal government. Judges in this country act as a check and balance for government legislation, if challenged. They are impartial arbiters, interpreting the charters of rights to balance individual or minority rights against political objectives. In Quebec, where an important linguistic minority relies on constitutional protections, the courts are their only redress at times, often against the backdrop of a highly charged language environment. We need only look across the border at the U.S. to see what can happen when the court system becomes politicized. If certain Quebec governments started to exert influence on the courts by appointing judges known for favouring collective rights over individual rights, or harbouring secessionist sympathies, for example, the last vestiges of protection for minority communities, including the certainty of Section 23, could vanish.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store