Mr. Chairman, this specifies that in deciding what conditions, if any, to impose on an NCR-accused, the factors to be considered by the court or review board must be based on medical evidence and expert testimony.
Mr. Chairman, Bill C-54, as proposed, establishes that public safety is a paramount consideration for decisions of review boards and courts with respect to NCR-accused. I want to make it clear that my proposed amendment does not change that. Rather, it clarifies that the determination of such public safety considerations must be, “on the basis of medical evidence and expert testimony”. I believe that without this, we might allow the impression to be had—and I don't think we'd want that impression to be had—that such determinations can be based on subjectivities of fear, or perhaps even reliance on stigma. Certainly, this cannot be Parliament's intention.
In a word, we must have expert testimony and medical evidence before us when such determinations are made, and this amendment seeks to clarify that this is indeed Parliament's intention with this provision.