Faint hope clause

Last updated

The "faint hope clause" is the popular name for s.745.6 of the Canadian Criminal Code, a statutory provision that allows prisoners who have been sentenced to life imprisonment with a parole eligibility period of greater than 15 years to apply for early parole once they have served 15 years. Offenders who committed their offence after December 2, 2011 are no longer eligible to apply for the faint hope clause. However, those convicted of offences that occurred prior to that date may still be eligible.

Contents

Process

The prisoner must apply to the Chief Justice of the province where he or she was convicted, and the Chief Justice (or another designated judge) then reviews the application to determine whether there is a reasonable chance the prisoner could be successful in his or her application before a jury; if the applicant is likely to succeed, the court will empanel a jury to hear the application.

The jury may hear evidence relating to the character of the prisoner, the prisoner's conduct while in prison, the nature of the offence, the effect of the crime on the family of the victim, and other information the presiding judge deems relevant.

The jury then decides whether the parole eligibility period should be reduced, and the decision to reduce the parole eligibility period must be unanimous. If the parole eligibility period is reduced, this "permits the prisoner to apply for" early parole, and the ultimate decision of whether to grant parole to the prisoner lies with the Parole Board of Canada.

History

The section was added in 1976 after Canada abolished the death penalty and replaced it with a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment for first and second degree murder. The clause was added in order to encourage convicted murderers in Canada to rehabilitate themselves, and to reflect the fact that other countries allowed convicted murderers to be paroled after an average of 15 years incarceration. Part of the reason for the clause was to reduce the risk of violence towards prison guards from prisoners serving life sentences and nothing to lose from committing further crimes inside prison. [1]

Judicial Reviews began in 1987. As of October 10, 2010, 1,508 offenders were eligible to apply for a judicial review. Of those eligible, there have been 181 court decisions, and 146 of these have resulted in an offender becoming eligible for earlier parole. Of these, 135 offenders have been granted parole.

The Government of Canada under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, elected in January 2006, pledged during the election campaign to repeal the clause for all offenders.

In August 2006, the Canadian Minister of Justice, Vic Toews, re-affirmed this commitment, stating that he would introduce legislation in the fall of 2006 to repeal the Faint Hope Clause. In June 2009, the Conservative Government introduced Bill C-36 to abolish the faint hope clause.

In November 2009, the bill passed the House of Commons and was referred to the Senate. The Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson, stated that "[b]y ending faint hope reviews, we are saying no to early parole for murderers." [2] However, the bill died on the order paper in the Senate on December 30, 2009, when Governor General Michaëlle Jean prorogued parliament on the advice of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. [3]

The same Bill was again reintroduced by the government in the Senate (Bill S-6) during following session of parliament in spring, 2010. After some delay that bill was passed by Parliament and given Royal Assent in March 2011. It came into force in December of that year. The faint hope clause is no longer available for any offences committed after December 2, 2011. [4]

Persons convicted of multiple murders that occurred after January 9, 1997 are ineligible to apply for a reduction in their parole eligibility period. This repeal occurred after convicted serial killer and rapist Clifford Olson unsuccessfully applied for release under the faint hope clause. [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

Life imprisonment is any sentence of imprisonment for a crime under which convicted criminals are to remain in prison for the rest of their natural lives. Crimes that warrant life imprisonment are usually violent and/or dangerous. Examples of crimes that result in life sentences are murder, torture, terrorism, child abuse resulting in death, rape, espionage, treason, drug trafficking, drug possession, human trafficking, severe fraud and financial crimes, aggravated criminal damage, arson, hate crime, kidnapping, burglary, and robbery, piracy, aircraft hijacking, and genocide.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1994 Oregon Ballot Measure 11</span> Citizens initiative passed in 1994

Measure 11, also known as "One Strike You're Out", was a citizens' initiative passed in 1994 in the U.S. State of Oregon. This statutory enactment established mandatory minimum sentencing for several crimes. The measure was approved in the November 8, 1994 general election with 788,695 votes in favor, and 412,816 votes against.

A pardon is a government decision to allow a person to be relieved of some or all of the legal consequences resulting from a criminal conviction. A pardon may be granted before or after conviction for the crime, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction.

In the United States, habitual offender laws have been implemented since at least 1952, and are part of the United States Justice Department's Anti-Violence Strategy. These laws require a person who is convicted of an offense and who has one or two other previous serious convictions to serve a mandatory life sentence in prison, with or without parole depending on the jurisdiction. The purpose of the laws is to drastically increase the punishment of those who continue to commit offenses after being convicted of one or two serious crimes.

Mandatory sentencing requires that offenders serve a predefined term of imprisonment for certain crimes, commonly serious or violent offenses. Judges are bound by law; these sentences are produced through the legislature, not the judicial system. They are instituted to expedite the sentencing process and limit the possibility of irregularity of outcomes due to judicial discretion. Mandatory sentences are typically given to people who are convicted of certain serious and/or violent crimes, and require a prison sentence. Mandatory sentencing laws vary across nations; they are more prevalent in common law jurisdictions because civil law jurisdictions usually prescribe minimum and maximum sentences for every type of crime in explicit laws.

In Canada, England, and Wales, certain convicted persons may be designated as dangerous offenders and subject to a longer, or indefinite, term of imprisonment in order to protect the public. Other countries, including Denmark, Norway, and parts of the United States have similar provisions of law.

Capital murder refers to a category of murder in some parts of the US for which the perpetrator is eligible for the death penalty. In its original sense, capital murder was a statutory offence of aggravated murder in Great Britain, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland, which was later adopted as a legal provision to define certain forms of aggravated murder in the United States. Some jurisdictions that provide for death as a possible punishment for murder, such as California, do not have a specific statute creating or defining a crime known as capital murder; instead, death is one of the possible sentences for certain kinds of murder. In these cases, "capital murder" is not a phrase used in the legal system but may still be used by others such as the media.

In the English and British tradition, the royal prerogative of mercy is one of the historic royal prerogatives of the British monarch, by which they can grant pardons to convicted persons. The royal prerogative of mercy was originally used to permit the monarch to withdraw, or provide alternatives to, death sentences; the alternative of penal transportation to "partes abroade" was used since at least 1617. It is now used to change any sentence or penalty. A royal pardon does not overturn a conviction.

A habitual offender, repeat offender, or career criminal is a person convicted of a crime who was previously convicted of other crimes. Various state and jurisdictions may have laws targeting habitual offenders, and specifically providing for enhanced or exemplary punishments or other sanctions. They are designed to counter criminal recidivism by physical incapacitation via imprisonment.

In England and Wales, life imprisonment is a sentence that lasts until the death of the prisoner, although in most cases the prisoner will be eligible for early release after a minimum term set by the judge. In exceptional cases a judge may impose a "whole life order", meaning that the offender is never considered for parole, although they may still be released on compassionate grounds at the discretion of the Home Secretary. Whole life orders are usually imposed for aggravated murder, and can only be imposed where the offender was at least 21 years old at the time of the offence being committed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice Act 2003</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is a wide-ranging measure introduced to modernise many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Large portions of the act were repealed and replaced by the Sentencing Act 2020.

The Parole Board of Canada is the Canadian government agency that is responsible for reviewing and issuing parole and criminal pardons in Canada. It operates under the auspices of Public Safety Canada.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which makes significant changes in many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In particular, it changes the law relating to custodial sentences and the early release of prisoners to reduce prison overcrowding, which reached crisis levels in 2008. It also reduces the right of prison officers to take industrial action, and changed the law on the deportation of foreign criminals. It received royal assent on 8 May 2008, but most of its provisions came into force on various later dates. Many sections came into force on 14 July 2008.

Life imprisonment in Canada is a criminal sentence for certain offences that lasts for the offender’s life. Parole is possible, but even if paroled, the offender remains under the supervision of Corrections Canada for their lifetime, and can be returned to prison for parole violations.

Life imprisonment has been the most severe criminal sentence in New Zealand since the death penalty was abolished in 1989, having not been used since 1957.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal sentencing in Canada</span> Overview of criminal sentencing in Canada

Canadian criminal law is governed by the Criminal Code, which includes the principles and powers in relation to criminal sentencing in Canada.

In Canada, homicide is the act of causing death to another person through any means, directly or indirectly. Homicide can either be culpable or non-culpable, with the former being unlawful under a category of offences defined in the Criminal Code, a statute passed by the Parliament of Canada that applies uniformly across the country. Murder is the most serious category of culpable homicide, the others being manslaughter and infanticide.

The New Zealand Parole Board is an independent statutory body established in 2002 that considers offenders for parole. Its task "is to undertake an assessment of the risk that long-term sentenced offenders might pose to the safety of the community if they were to be released before the end of their sentence". The Board also sets conditions of release for offenders so their reintegration back in to the community can be effectively managed. Once the conditions are set it becomes the responsibility of Community Corrections to manage the offender." 'Long term' is defined as more than 24 months. Short-term prisoners are automatically released after serving half their sentence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010</span>

The Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010, now repealed, was an Act of Parliament in New Zealand that denied parole to repeat violent offenders, and imposed maximum terms of imprisonment on repeat offenders who commit three serious violent offences - unless it would be manifestly unjust. The law was known informally in New Zealand public, media and government circles as the "three-strikes law".

<i>R v Bissonnette</i> Canadian legal decision

R v Bissonnette, 2022 SCC 23 is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of Canada which held that life sentences without a realistic possibility of parole constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The Court unanimously struck down section 745.51 of the Criminal Code, which gave sentencing judges the discretion to stack periods of parole ineligibility for multiple murders, for violating Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

References

  1. ↑ "Ottawa study praising 'faint hope' clause for murderers never released - The Globe and Mail".
  2. ↑ Globe and Mail, Jun. 05, 2009
  3. ↑ Parliament of Canada, LEGISinfo, retrieved Jan. 21, 2010
  4. ↑ "The "Faint Hope Clause"". The Canadian Criminal Justice Association. Retrieved 30 December 2023.
  5. ↑ "Backgrounder: the "faint hope clause"". Global News. 5 June 2009. Retrieved 30 December 2023.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.