Die liberale Regierung legt einen Gesetzentwurf zum Schutz von Kindern vor, die Opfer geschlechtsspezifischer Gewalt sind
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/protecting-victims-act-9.7008662
Die liberale Regierung legt einen Gesetzentwurf zum Schutz von Kindern vor, die Opfer geschlechtsspezifischer Gewalt sind
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/protecting-victims-act-9.7008662
3 Kommentare
Once again, the government’s backgrounders on the matter are very thorough and easy for non-legal minds like mine to comprehend:
[Protecting Victims Act: Proposed legislation to protect victims and keep kids safe from predators](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/c16/index.html)
[Mandatory minimum penalties of imprisonment and Bill C-16](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/c16/mmpi-pmoe.html)
[Proposed changes to sentences in Bill C-16](https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/pl/c16/pcs-mpp.html)
Repost from the duplicate thread:
>On Tuesday, Ottawa said it will require courts to consider other options rather than a stay of proceedings – which effectively ends a case – when a court finds that an accused person’s right to be tried within a reasonable time has been violated. Ottawa said this will “reduce the number of cases being thrown out due to court delays.”
Translation: We’re sorry for slow-walking your criminal trial, and as a consequence, we would like the courts to continue to infringe upon your rights without us actually proving you are guilty.
The only way I’d find these measures acceptable, is if the accused is ultimately acquitted, the Crown is required to pay all attorney’s fees and compensate the vindicated individual for the emotional and physical harm the state has put them through. A criminal charge should not be a license to effectively indefinitely incarcerate an innocent person.
> Restore all mandatory minimum penalties of imprisonment that are currently inoperative because they have been found unconstitutional by the courts.
As it turns out, Liberals are capable of supporting mandatory minimum sentences. I guess it only took the Supreme Court striking down the one-year minimum for the possession of child sexual abuse material to realize the courts erred on the wrong side.