I'm going to leave a question because there probably isn't an answer yet. But if there is, I'd like to think there might be some information forthcoming later, in the event it truly is an issue.
It has to do with this decision by prosecutors about whether to proceed by way of indictment or summary conviction. In the way this legislation is structured, there'll be a new set of variables inserted into that decision--in other words, when the prosecutor makes the decision. Before, it had to do with the old Criminal Code separation between the summary and the indictable. Now the sentencing options are going to be affected by this.
The question I will leave—because I'm sure there isn't an answer yet—is does this raise the spectre or the issue of a citizen arguing post-charter that he or she is being subjected to arbitrary measures in the prosecutor's decision? It's not a judge making the decision; it's not the law making the decision. Instead, it becomes a prosecutorial decision that has this additional implication or dimension. I'm just raising the issue as to whether or not this might be seen through the charter lens as an arbitrary measure exercised by a prosecutor, affecting the rights and liberties of the individual in a material way and in a way that might not be consistent with the law—