Public Safety committee  Thank you very much. I certainly would like to thank the committee for allowing the Canadian Bar Association the opportunity to comment on Bill C-5 and the issue of international transfer of offenders. As Ms. Schellenberg indicated, the CBA section represents the views of both

Public Safety committee  I think that point is quite clear. As Mr. Holland mentioned, there are different rates of recidivism in our two countries. As Mr. Conroy mentioned earlier, in the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 in the United States, rehabilitation was removed as a principle of sentencing there. Al

Public Safety committee  One would hope that any minister of the crown would act honourably, but one has to be aware that excessive ministerial discretion is fundamentally at odds with the rule of law. Every minister requires some discretion in carrying out the functions of his or her office. There is no

Public Safety committee  I wanted to follow up on one point of your question, Mr. Kania. One of the reasons this does not protect Canadians is that it specifically does not provide protection for victims of crime. At present, as has been stated a number of times, the offender will come back, and there w

Public Safety committee  Well, sir, if I could refer you, in the English version, to page 5 of our submission, specifically in the middle paragraph, it says, “Where an offender is transferred back to Canada to serve a sentence, authorities will also know whether that person requires continued interventio

Public Safety committee  Obviously I wasn't there in your conversation with the person, but what every victim would have to also know is that the offender has the constitutional right to come back. Would you rather have this person come back to Canada, and whatever they have done to you prior to offendin

Public Safety committee  On Mr. Waldman's constitutional point, simply on legislation drafting principles, I don't see how you can possibly amend this bill sufficiently to make it conform to our international obligations or to the Constitution.

Public Safety committee  Yes, sir.

Public Safety committee  I hardly think that's the issue. The situation is that under the present legislation the minister can look at those criteria and bring the offender home. What this does is it permits the minister almost unreviewable discretion, and when we see how this has been applied--Mr. Conr

Public Safety committee  No, sir, I do not. First of all, the offender's health is not a determining factor. It doesn't matter if you're ill or robust...as to whether or not you should be able to return to your own country to serve sentence. You mentioned paragraph (i) as well, “accepted responsibility

Public Safety committee  The minister can use those right now. You don't need these amendments to do that, assuming they're everything you wish them to be, sir. Every minister could consider that this is a Canadian, this person is in need of medical care, and the person can be transferred back. You don't

Public Safety committee  That's untrammelled discretion, which we of course oppose.

Public Safety committee  When you say there may be a larger number, with respect, that is simply speculation. We don't know what the numbers are. What we are suggesting to this committee is that this particular piece of legislation does not meet the goals the minister set out in the House. This is simply

Public Safety committee  I would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to present the views of the Canadian Bar Association on this very important legislation. There is no question that the prevention of terrorist action is vital to preserving our society. This requires effective legislation,

Public Safety committee  I could make a number of comments in response to Mr. Leef. I'll try to do it quickly, Mr. Scott, so that I don't take up much of your time. First of all, my purpose, from the Canadian Bar Association, is to analyze this legislation. We have tools. We have the Criminal Code. We h