Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my support for a Charter of Rights and Freedoms viable reverse onus of proof in the proceeds of crime cases.
Currently, the Criminal Code does allow for the forfeiture of proceeds of crime allows the forfeiture of the proceeds of crime, upon application by the Crown, and after a conviction for a designated offence. Once culpability has been proven, the Crown must show on a balance of probabilities that the property is the proceeds of crime and that the property is connected to the crime.
If no connection between the offence for which the offender was convicted and the property is established, the judge may order the forfeiture of the property if he or she is satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the property is proceeds of crime.
Although these provisions have been in force for quite some time and have in fact been successful to a significant degree, we need to work towards ensuring that criminals, especially those primarily motivated by financial benefit, do not profit from their ill-gotten gains.
Committing crime for financial benefit is the hallmark of organized crime. Whether these crimes involve drugs, prostitution, fraud or whatever, organized crime is fuelled by greed.
It is the proceeds of this criminal activity which allow organized criminals to commit further crime, recruit further members and facilitate generally the criminal operation of these groups. Organized crime demands specific, focussed and sustained responses.
We as a Liberal government have taken significant steps over the past few years in the fight against organized crime, first with Bill C-95, in 1997, and, most recently, in 2001, with Bill C-24.
Bill C-24, which came into force in 2002, included a simplified definition of “criminal organization”, three new criminal organization offences and tough sentencing and parole eligibility provisions.
These amendments also improved the protection from intimidation for people who play a role in the justice system and broadened law enforcement powers to forfeit the proceeds of crime and seize property that was used in a crime.
This clearly demonstrates that this Liberal government is committed to combating organized crime.
These and other tools found in the Criminal Code are being used by law enforcement and prosecutors in the fight against organized crime.
Despite significant legislative activity in this area recently, we need to evaluate whether prosecutors have all the necessary tools to advance on this front, as organized crime groups are now becoming increasingly sophisticated, complex and adaptive in their criminal ventures.
Clearly, this assessment should examine whether a reverse onus in proceeds of crime cases would contribute to the disruption of criminal organizations. In my view it would.
As this matter advances, it is important to have the views of the provinces on this issue. In many cases, their prosecutors are the ones bringing the proceeds of crime applications, given their authority to prosecute most Criminal Code offences.
As a government, we have taken a step in the right direction. In January 2005, federal, provincial and territorial ministers for justice discussed proposals to change the Criminal Code to create a reverse onus for the proceeds of crime regime.
According to joint news release issued, and I quote:
All Ministers agreed that the ability to obtain the forfeiture of proceeds of crime is needed and the federal justice minister said he intends to move forward as quickly as possible with changes that meet charter requirements.
The federal-provincial-territorial forum is useful in gauging provincial support on issues such as these. Based on the outcome from this meeting, it appears there is general support for the need to advance a reverse onus provision that is within the parameters of the Charter.
The requirement that any advancement in this area be viable from a charter perspective is a very important one. A balance must be struck in crafting a reverse onus scheme which represents a useful tool for prosecutors, over and above what is now available under our current proceeds of crime scheme, while doing so within the limits prescribed by the Constitution.
This is a very important consideration as charter viability will ensure that our prosecutors will have this tool, and that it will be effective to take away criminal profits for years to come.
This motion is directed at ensuring that criminals are not permitted to financially or materially benefit from the commission of criminal offences. It is one which is targeted at fighting crime in the most effective way—by taking the profit out of it.