That's a good question.
The first one was the right of appeal for an offender where a judge would order...extended beyond the 25 years. Extended parole eligibility under Bill C-235 already results from deliberate judicial discretion informed by a jury input. Adding an offender appeal right layers more process onto sentences designed for the most aggravated murder cases. It would undermine the finality and potentially expose victims' families to prolonged litigation, which is precisely what this bill is aiming to protect them from.
The Criminal Code already provides for a robust appellate review of sentencing. This amendment, I believe, does not fill that gap. Rather, it would create one.