Mr. Speaker, the public is used to hearing politicians talk about importance of victims' rights, especially when a horrific crime is committed. What we have before us today is not just talk about protecting the victims of crime, but to actually do something.
Bill C-243 is designed to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to provide that in the case of an offender who is serving a sentence for first-degree murder or second-degree murder, parole is reviewed in accordance with the statutory time frames instead of an application by the offender. This would be done after the parole board has decided not to grant day or full parole to the offender.
It is a simple change, but one that would have a profound effect on the families of crime victims. Most of us will never know the pain that comes with losing a loved one to murder. Thankfully, such crimes are rare in Canada, but they do occur. When they occur, families are thrown into a legal system that can be overwhelming. Frequently, it seems weighted in favour of the accused and the convicted killer with the rights of families forgotten.
According to our Criminal Code:
Culpable homicide is murder
(a) where the person who causes the death of a human being
(i) means to cause his death, or
(ii) means to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and is reckless whether death ensues or not;
(b) where a person, meaning to cause death to a human being or meaning to cause him bodily harm that he knows is likely to cause his death, and being reckless whether death ensues or not, by accident or mistake causes death to another human being, notwithstanding that he does not mean to cause death or bodily harm to that human being; or
(c) if a person, for an unlawful object, does anything that they know is likely to cause death, and by doing so causes the death of a human being, even if they desire to effect their object without causing death or bodily harm to any human being.
I am repeating those words from the Criminal Code to remind us of the gravity of the offence. The taking of a human life is the worst crime we can imagine. Every life is precious. For someone to deliberately and unjustifiably end a life is deserving of the most serious punishment we can mete out. That is why we hand out life sentences. That is why we limit eligibility for parole.
At the same time, Canadians believe in the possibility of rehabilitation and redemption. That is why even those convicted of murder are eligible for parole. We believe there is hope even for those who commit the worst crimes. That is why even those convicted of first degree murder have the right to a parole hearing once a certain amount of time has passed. We acknowledge that people can and do change.
The Corrections and Conditional Release Act reminds us:
The purpose of conditional release is to contribute to the maintenance of a just, peaceful and safe society by means of decisions on the timing and conditions of release that will best facilitate the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community as law-abiding citizens.
It also says:
The protection of society is the paramount consideration for the Board and the provincial parole boards in the determination of all cases.
In order to do that:
Parole boards take into consideration all relevant available information, including the stated reasons and recommendations of the sentencing judge, the nature and gravity of the offence, the degree of responsibility of the offender, information from the trial or sentencing process and information obtained from victims, offenders and other components of the criminal justice system, including assessments provided by correctional authorities;
As the system is now structured, and what this bill sets out to correct, an offender can apply for parole a year after being refused parole by a parole board. I do not think that is right when it comes to those who are convicted of murder, our most serious crime.
A parole board hearing is a serious affair. Prisoners hoping to be released make a case as to why the punishment they have already received is sufficient. They explain why they are no longer a danger to society. However, that is not all that is presented. There is also a case made as to why the parole application should be denied. The prisoner's progress is evaluated, the case is revisited and memories are stirred.
For the families of the murder victims, the trauma of the crime is revisited. They are expected to testify and to describe the impact on their lives of the untimely loss of a loved one through the criminal actions of another. They are asked to revisit a nightmare and, as the law now stands, they can be asked to revisit this nightmare every year. The system revictimizes the victims of the crime for no good purpose.
One of the great things about being human is that we have the capacity for change. We can repent our actions and be redeemed, but for most of us, that is a process, which is why I support Bill C-243. This legislation would take into account the reality that change can be a slow process. I believe there is hope for even those who have committed the worst crimes. I believe that people can and do change their ways. I believe that those who show true remorse for their actions and have been rehabilitated deserve another chance. That is why we have parole boards to consider whether those who have committed crimes can now be safely returned to society.
I do not believe that the parole application process should be used by convicts to revictimize Canadians. To me, it seems highly unlikely that someone deemed inappropriate for release by a parole board this year will change so completely in 12 months that the board will change its mind. There is a provision for mandatory review whether the offender requests it or not.
This legislation would not change mandatory review. What it would do is put an end to the annual revictimization of the families of a murder victim in a hearing that is almost predestined to end with the offender remaining incarcerated.
Those who care about victims' rights should support this bill. I congratulate my hon. colleague and neighbour from Edmonton Griesbach for putting together this important bill.