Justice committee  Yes. I think as long as they're providing transportation services to the public and they're using a vehicle when they do it, this provision would capture it.

Justice committee  Absolutely, the judge will always have the ability to consider whatever circumstances he deems appropriate as aggravating or mitigating, given the particular facts of the case.

Justice committee  It's another good question. We have another provision in the code in that similar type of language, “engaged in the performance of their duties” and it has been interpreted fairly restrictively in those contexts as relating to a specific duty that the professional has and that

Justice committee  I think they would be, provided that they are “an individual who operates a vehicle used in the provision of passenger transportation services to the public”. I think it's a non-exhaustive scheme because “vehicle” provides a number of examples—bus, paratransit vehicle—so you c

Justice committee  It's interesting. I think it's hard to say whether the rickshaw driver would be captured, because of the point Mr. Wilks has made with respect to the definition of motor vehicle. If the courts read “vehicle” in a more expansive way than “motor vehicle”, to include vehicles that a

Justice committee  I think I understand the question. I think it is a good question and I think the explanation by Madam Boivin is a good one. The proposed provision says “vehicle includes” and then it lists a number of specific types of vehicles. From an administrative perspective, I think polic

Justice committee  I don't know if it's fair to say that it would prejudice the decision. The interplay between Parliament and the Supreme Court, I think, is well known. You as parliamentarians have the ability to enact legislation as you see fit. I would suggest that were you to pass an amendment

Justice committee  Thank you. I think the rationale is fairly self-evident. We have ongoing litigation, as you've alluded to, before the Supreme Court of Canada. I guess one of the facts of passing legislation that would amend the Criminal Code in a way that would touch upon a provision that is cur

Justice committee  I think you're right. If you choose to take it out and it's found to be constitutional, then the opposite holds true. If you haven't passed legislation, then obviously this type of provision wouldn't exist in the Criminal Code. At some point, were the government or a private memb

Justice committee  Just to pick up on a few things, certainly it wouldn't be inconsistent. It would provide greater clarity to the courts if you had that type of language; this is one factor among any number of factors that a court can take into consideration. I think that kind of language would

Justice committee  Well, I guess I can provide you some context to help you in your decision-making process. As you know, the courts will be able to take into consideration whatever factor they think is appropriate in terms of their jurisdiction to decide that something is aggravating in a particu

Justice committee  Certainly, it's similar to other provisions. I wouldn't go as far as calling it inconsistent. I would say it's different in the sense that, for example, the reference to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act is broader in application. So if this committee and Parliament were to

Justice committee  I think the other piece to recognize too is that from a criminal law perspective, these concepts as they appear in Bill C-310, violence, force, and coercion, are roughly talking about the same thing in a criminal law context. I don't have the amendment in front of me, but my se

Justice committee  That's what it looks like. Thank you for the draft amendment. Certainly I think that “force” and “coercion” would capture your concerns, Mr. Harris, in terms of the threats of violence, overt threats, not necessarily to you—“you know what we did in this situation”. They are ess

Justice committee  Absolutely. My understanding of the intent behind the bill is to really expand on and codify what the law is already. When the trafficking offences were developed and enacted in 2005 and this test of exploitation was developed, it was meant to capture all of the conduct you've