Justice committee  That's correct. The more you avoid the confusion, then you're simply left with the question of a domestic offence. Then you look at the offence and decide whether the elements are appropriate.

Justice committee  The existing code could apply to this conduct. The proposal for the new offence is really just to have a more specific definition of denunciation. But the existing offences would cover the conduct.

Justice committee  Or it signals to the courts that they should be looking more at the higher end of an existing range of penalty, if you go as an aggravating circumstance.

Justice committee  That would help to rectify the concerns that Global Affairs Canada would have. Making the new offence not look like section 269.1 would be the best situation for us in terms of our lobbying efforts to make countries accountable for torture, that there's only one definition of tor

Justice committee  I believe the bill actually has a provision which would say that this offence would qualify as a predicate offence for a dangerous offender status.

Justice committee  I've no comment. Our discussion with Global Affairs Canada is what I reiterated to you, their concerns about having two offences of torture. There's only one offence of torture internationally and there should only be one offence of torture and we should not be having multiple

Justice committee  Are you talking about the bill or the proposed amendment?

Justice committee  The proposed amendment has brought back all kinds of language from 269.1 which Bill C-242 does not have. The proposed amendment has brought back in all kinds of attributes of state torture. It talks about consent, acquiescence, the defence of superior orders, and the exclusion of

Justice committee  You'd have to look at the elements of the offence, if you were creating your offence, and see how it relates to the range of other offences because after 14 years, the only other offence that Parliament has ever imposed is life imprisonment. It's a jump from 14 to life. That's wh

Justice committee  As I think both Ms. Wright and I indicated, Parliament is free to create another offence. If you call it torture, then we'd have two offences of torture in the Criminal Code, and it will cause the problem that Ms. Wright referred to earlier.

Justice committee  Mr. Nicholson, I'm employed to give recommendations to the Government of Canada—

Justice committee  As I indicated earlier, we have an offence of sexual assault, and we have an offence of aggravated sexual assault. Whether we have three levels of sexual assault or four levels of sexual assault, the issue as to why victims don't come forward isn't the name of the offence or the

Justice committee  I'm not sure that it would. We have aggravated sexual assault. Does that make victims feel better than simply having one offence of sexual assault? The issue, as I said in my previous answer, is that if victims want a certain recognition that intentional infliction of harm is

Justice committee  I have no suggestion, Mr. Nicholson.

Justice committee  That's one avenue. Another avenue is to simply put an aggravating circumstance into the existing offence of aggravated assault, such that as a sentencing factor, if the harm that was caused was intentionally caused and not just recklessly caused, that could be an aggravating fact