 |
| John L. Hill |
Deputy Police Chief Robert Johnson of Toronto expressed his appreciation for the Provincial Carjacking Joint Task Force, a successful operation that led to the arrest of 124 individuals. The task force, a collaborative effort involving the Ontario Provincial Police, the Toronto Police Service and police forces from Greater Toronto area municipalities, demonstrated the commitment and effectiveness of law enforcement agencies. However, Johnson’s announcement that the operation had been wrapped up included a disturbing addendum. The deputy chief added, “However, law enforcement is just one part of the solution. It’s really concerning that 44 per cent of those arrested were out on bail at the time of their arrest, and 61 per cent were subsequently released on bail yet again.”
Deputy Chief Johnson’s remark implies a potential risk in our criminal courts, suggesting a “catch and release” policy that has become the hallmark of the “get tough on crime” political ideologues. The statement raises questions about why so many were granted bail only to supposedly reoffend, seemingly overlooking the principle of presumption of innocence.
Johnson noted that 36 of the 124 people arrested (29 per cent) were young offenders and 47 per cent were reoffenders. Johnson seemed to imply that it would solve the crime problem if only the courts could read crystal balls accurately to ascertain who might go on to commit serious offences. In citing statistics, Johnson failed to show that the courts and provincial prosecutors were misapplying the laws regarding judicial interim release. Perhaps what was intended is that once arrested, an individual should sit for months in maximum-security custody awaiting trial. It would also be good to know that filling our provincial jails with these presumed offenders would not overload the system, and actual rehabilitation would follow.
However, there was also the second news story. Provincial ombudsman Paul Dubé issued a 104-page report describing problems at Ontario correctional centres that topped his list of concerns. Complaints included delayed medical care, overcrowding, solitary confinement and use of force by correctional officers. Dubé and his team visited the Sudbury Jail, the Maplehurst Correctional Complex in Milton, the Vanier Centre for Women in Milton and the Hamilton-Wentworth Detention Centre. They discovered overcrowding and rodent infestation.
The ombudsman stated that “poor living conditions and a mouse infestation” were discussed with management at the Sudbury Jail. At the same time, overcrowding at the Vanier Centre led to complaints of “no access to services, including showers, due to construction projects.”
According to a Toronto Star report, Dubé would not comment on whether the push for bail reform from Premier Doug Ford and others would worsen overcrowding in jails. However, he did stress that most inmates are awaiting trial and are presumed innocent, highlighting the potential consequences of overcrowding in our correctional system.
When addressing a public safety issue, it’s tempting to believe that incarcerating all suspects will solve it. However, this approach can lead to public disillusionment with our judicial system, which relies on public trust to maintain its legitimacy. Balancing public safety and preserving trust in our judicial system is crucial. It is unfortunate when police attach political statements that serve only to heighten fear that our criminal justice system is broken.
Have these news stories convinced us that our criminal law is operating effectively to preserve public safety and order? For those who are locked away, we need more than the ombudsman’s critical report, which will likely gather dust in the months ahead. Meanwhile, those condemned to serve time in jail awaiting a hearing in our over-clogged courts are perhaps getting a course on becoming better criminals.
John L. Hill practised and taught prison law until his retirement. He holds a J.D. from Queen’s and an LL.M. in constitutional law from Osgoode Hall. He is also the author of Pine Box Parole: Terry Fitzsimmons and the Quest to End Solitary Confinement (Durvile & UpRoute Books). Contact him at johnlornehill@hotmail.com.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.