Canada’s Bill C-51 compromises sexual assault fair trial rights

Jody Wilson-Raybould

Canadian Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould announced Bill C-51 in June 2017 (

This last week, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Beverley McLachlin waded into the #IBelieveSurvivors debate. She made some startling but important and refreshing comments about the rights of an accused person in a sexual assault trial, and the rights of complainants in sexual assault cases.
Her comments that have been most quoted are these: “no one has the right to a particular verdict.” And she is absolutely right.
However, the Government has proposed a piece of legislation that seems to codify the opposite. With Bill C-51, the Federal Government is trying to make it so that sexual assault complainants are, in essence, guaranteed a verdict unless the defence shows that a sexual assault did not occur.
In Canadian criminal law, the burden of proof rests with the Crown. That burden is to prove charges beyond a reasonable doubt. In R. v. Lifchus, the Supreme Court of Canada stated: “If the presumption of innocence is the golden thread of criminal justice then proof beyond a reasonable doubt is the silver and these two threads are forever intertwined in the fabric of criminal law.” It is an intrinsic and necessary aspect of fair trial rights.
But Bill C-51 compromises these fair trial rights.
Currently, our legal system allows an accused individual to raise the defence of mistaken believe in consent. This cannot be raised in certain circumstances, like having sex with someone who is unconscious or where someone asserts that they are not consenting.
But the changes to the law make an important distinction: they now prevent the defence of mistaken belief in consent from being raised where there is no evidence of actual consent. This is problematic. Because although the case law seems to indicate that such evidence is often necessary this does not preclude the defence from being raised where there is no evidence.
This is because the mistaken belief in consent defence relates to the mens rea – the mental element – of the offence of sexual assault. It is about the state of mind not of the complainant but of the accused. Whether he or she believed that the person they were engaging in a sex act with actually consented to that. And human sexual behaviour being what it is, the absence of actual consent does not necessarily mean that there was no consent.
Further, by codifying that the requirement is that there is “evidence” of consent, this poses a practical burden for the accused. Whereas before, a skilfully conducted cross-examination could suffice to raise a reasonable doubt in this regard, now actual evidence of the accused’s state of mind and what he relied on in coming to that state of mind is necessary. This places a necessary burden on the accused in all cases of mistaken belief in consent that he or she must testify. That is inconsistent with the right to silence

What the Government has done is taken the law one step too far.
​The government is now requiring judges to convict in cases of sexual assault based on the absence of evidence. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Statistically speaking, false reports may occur as much as 10% of the time. If one in ten people accused of sexual assault is innocent but all ten are sent to jail as a result of these changes, our justice system becomes a failure.
But what is even more scary about this bill, and what Justice McLachlin’s comments strike at, is the issue of the right to make full answer and defence. It severely limits the ability of a person accused of sexual assault to tender evidence at their trial.

Essentially, what Bill C-51 purports to do is create a brand new situation known to Canadian law. Complainants in sexual assault trials will now have the right to be heard on whether the defence is permitted to introduce any record they have into evidence at the trial, through any witness. If it’s a police officer’s notes, the complainant has to be heard. If it’s a recording of the sexual interaction in question, the complainant has to be heard. And the complainant can oppose the introduction of this evidence, even where it clearly establishes the innocence of the accused.
By giving the people who are bringing the accusations forward the participatory rights in evidentiary hearings, Parliament is effectively saying “Accused persons in a criminal trial have trial fairness rights, only insofar as they fit comfortably with what those who are making the accusations wish them to have.” This is an affront to justice, and creates a two-tiered justice system. If these proposed changes are passed, sexual assault accusers will have more trial fairness rights than those who are facing the charges.
Given the strict consequences of a criminal trial, this cannot be the case. The Chief Justice is right: no one has the right to a particular verdict. What accused persons have is the right to a fair trial, the right to make full answer and defence, and the right to be presumed innocent. This bill compromises those rights seemingly to make complainants and accusers feel better.
The criminal law is not about making people feel better. The criminal law is about determining truth within the confines of the Charter and fair trial principles. And as harsh as it sounds, feelings are best left outside the courtroom.

29 thoughts on “Canada’s Bill C-51 compromises sexual assault fair trial rights”

  1. There will always be someone who will accompany you to fulfill your unfulfilled wishes, send you flowers, accompany you to watch the sunrise and sunset, accompany you to walk the Yangtze River Bridge to accompany you to play the carousel, and spend the rest of your life with you.

  2. Tomorrow will be a long journey, tonight without sleep, I do n’t know when to see you on this trip, I miss it, and send my most sincere wishes to my best friend.

  3. When the love is strong, eachother is in the sea; when the love is weak, it is the same. Love cannot fade when it is strong, but it is difficult to thick when it is weak. Love is difficult to face, that is why it is embarrassing!

  4. To be a person is to be like a flower, whether or not anyone sees it, but you must bloom. You do not bloom for others but for yourself. Don’t do other people’s rewards, just be the most dazzling self!

  5. Maybe, there are ten people who want to step you under your feet, but your strength makes them have no chance to reach out. Don’t complain about this world’s weak meat and strong food, you will gradually discover.

  6. There is a kind of love that is deeply in love, but can’t say it; there is a kind of love that obviously wants to give up, but can’t give up; there is a kind of love, knowing that it is suffering, but can’t hold back; Can’t take it back already.

  7. Time will always give you the answer, who is the one who really hurts you and who really cares about you; who is who you care about but who cares nothing about you. Some people are not worth cherishing too much, while others are worth cherishing

  8. With so many posts that end up with no comments and more bloggers every day ditching comments all together I think it’s going to be interesting to see how the way in which we handle comments evolves in the future. I’ve used CommentLuv Pro for years and it works very well.
    I still believe in blog comments. Even if they are a pain to manage, people who read an article and have a question are much more likely to do so on your comments in hopes of receiving a response. If they don’t have that option, they might seek an answer on another site instead.

  9. I agree, Kristi. I rarely read blogs that don’t have comments. When I have time to read, I want to do so in a community where I can interact with the writer and other readers.
    This has been an evergreen question to me. Any system I tried hasn’t been perfect, most are frustrating. I like owning my comments but WordPress hasn’t managed to improve their comment system. I can’t figure it out! Commenting is what makes blogging so awesome: Why does WordPress keep tweaking the dashboard but they’ve never got around to improving the commenting functionality!?

  10. Interesting comments in here. As a commenter and reader, I quite like Disqus. It’s a single profile that I’ve been using across the major social and marketing blogs that I visit and it seems to be used by them, so I’m quite happy using it, and they send me decent notifications and updates about conversations happening in my network and people replying to stuff. They could improve their content discovery engine, but that’s not really their core business so I understand why they’re not spending too much time in that space.
    While running Disqus comments on a blog that I managed, I didn’t find too much trouble running it either. It gave me quick moderation control, filtered out a lot of the spam automatically and accidentally at times flagged good comments as spam – but it seemed to work fine.

  11. Maybe some people like posting comments with Facebook, but I feel like there’s a worry about the activity being posted to your feed. With Disqus, they don’t have to worry about that and moderation is really good for the blogger.
    I see your point, although you aren’t completely anonymous with Disqus either. Maybe Facebook is better for blogs where you are not likely to see much controversial comments.

  12. The one thing I haven’t figured out how to do is to search for specific users on the platform. For example I wanted to search for some of the other great Social media blogs I know so I can follow them but I couldn’t find a function to specifically search for these users.
    for blog commenting you can go through facebook, google, disqus. In WordPress you can use plugins for blog commenting

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Call Now ButtonCALL ME NOW Scroll to Top