That's a very important question.
I do believe in the presumption of innocence under the charter, and in being entitled to reasonable bail at the earliest opportunity and on the least onerous terms unless justified otherwise. However, reverse-onus requirements are absolutely essentially needed for repeat violent offenders who use weapons in the commission of violent offences. In those cases, the onus clearly should be on the accused to show why they ought not to be detained and that public safety is given the appropriate consideration and weight so that we don't see more violence in our communities at the hands of these offenders.