The National Pardon Centre™

An interesting development came out of a quick trip to Ottawa yesterday. I was invited by John Hutton of the John Howard society to attend a press conference denouncing the Conservative’s Omnibus Crime Bill C-10, specifically the section that deals with pardons.

Bill C-10 contains a measure to deny pardons to anybody convicted of more than three indictable offences. However, the way this particular section of the bill was written leaves it open to interpretation, although it is not quite as ambiguous as I originally thought.

Language is a tricky thing to manage. A simple comma can change the meaning of an entire paragraph.

See the section on three strikes below. When I originally read this measure online I could not see the comma preceding requirement that each offence be sentenced to more than 2 years in prison (printed in italics below). Without the comma the 2 years could apply to both the indictable offence criteria AND the service offence criteria, or to only the service offence. As it stands I now believe that the two years or more applies to both. But I could be wrong. Language is a tricky thing.

 Here is the clause. Have a read and make your own decision on its actual meaning:

(2) Subject to subsection (3), a person is ineligible to apply for a record suspension if he or she has been convicted of

• (b) more than three offences each of which either was prosecuted by indictment or is a service offence that is subject to a maximum punishment of imprisonment for life, and for each of which the person was sentenced to imprisonment for two years or more.

Three strikes is still a remarkably short sighted social policy. But I can personally confirm that hundreds of our clients we thought would be ineligible for a pardon will remain eligible. And it’s all because of a comma in a paragraph.

Of course that is how I am interpreting the bill. It could probably be debated. Perhaps it’s a conversation to be saved for a Charter challenge.  

Debate over the crime bill has been frustrating to say the least. It feels like the majority Conservative government prefers to put its fingers in its ears and ignore anything the public has to say about this issue. That is why it was very refreshing to see at least one Tory Senator come out against the pardon fee increase.

Please click the following link to proceed to the CBC website and read the original article online. Otherwise it is reprinted below:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/09/30/pol-pardon-cost.html

Conservatives urged to rethink pardon fee increase

By Alison Crawford, CBC News

Posted: Sep 30, 2011 8:08 AM ET

Last Updated: Sep 30, 2011 8:02 AM ET

Read 0 comments0 Accessibility Links

A Conservative senator is urging the government to go back to the drawing board on its proposal to quadruple the fees for seeking a criminal pardon.

Every year, thousands of Canadians apply for pardons in order to get a job, pass security clearances and travel. Right now a criminal record suspension costs $150, but the government is moving to a cost-recovery model for pardons and wants to charge all applicants $631.

Ontario Conservative Senator Bob Runciman said he thinks the National Parole Board should consider the complexity of each case when calculating fees.

“I think there’s an inherent unfairness in the approach the parole board is taking in recommending to Parliament, and hopefully we can change that,” he said.

Processing a pardon for shoplifting is more straightforward than processing a pardon for someone with a long criminal record or someone who was convicted of arson or assault.

Denis Ladouceur, with the parole board, testified about the process before a group of senators studying the fee increase.

“If it’s an indictable offence, then the act compels my staff to do more exhaustive verifications,” he said. “We need to go back to when the offence or offences occurred — the nature of the offence, the gravity of those offences.”

Senator suggests tiered approach

Runciman said he’d like to see an approach where there’s “three or four tiers based on the level of the crime committed.”

Francis Scarpaleggia, the Liberal public safety critic, is open to the idea of a tiered approach.

“Maybe that’s the kind of nuance we need when we’re looking at this issue,” Scarpaleggia said.

The NDP’s justice critic said his party opposes any fee increases.

For the government’s part, a spokesman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said calculating fees on a case-by-case basis would be time-consuming and make the pardons process more expensive.

A pardon doesn’t erase a conviction, but it allows people who have completed their sentences and shown they are law-abiding to have their criminal record “kept separate and apart” from other criminal records, the parole board says.

John Hutton of the John Howard Society and I have been exchanging emails discussing the omnibus crime bill that is currently creating so much debate. He recently forwarded me the press release from the association urging parliament to reject the bill. I am reposting it for anyone here who would like to see that there is a lot of effort being put into stopping this bill.

For Immediate Release

 Manitobans Oppose the Omnibus Crime Bill

 A broad based coalition of Manitobans is calling on local Members of Parliament not to support the federal government’s crime omnibus bill. 

“Although it is a federal bill, it will have a huge impact on provincial corrections which are already severely over-crowded, especially here in Manitoba.  Two years ago, the union representing Correctional Officers reported that Manitoba Jails were housing 600 inmates more than they were designed for, and despite building more jail cells, overcrowding has gotten worse since then”, observed John Hutton, Executive Director of the John Howard Society of Manitoba.  “Yet here is the federal government poised to force the provinces to house even more inmates in overcrowded jails when there is no evidence to show that this would even reduce crime on the streets – and a great deal of evidence to show that it won’t.”

 Aboriginal people make up 12% of Manitoba’s population and represent approximately 70% of those who are incarcerated. “The proposed changes in the omnibus, would further entrench the marginalization of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada without offering any meaningful or tangible benefit, while making the existing challenges even worse”, observed Jessica Dumas, from the Southern Chiefs Organization. 

Proposed changes to the pardon legislation, contained in the omnibus legislation are of particular concern.  “A provision in the omnibus would prevent anyone with more than three indictable offences from ever getting a pardon”, Hutton stated.  “This could potentially affect hundreds of thousands of Canadians, placing an unnecessary obstacle in the way of those trying to move forward and live crime free lives.  This could actually make us unsafe”, Hutton concluded.

 A board member of the John Howard Society, Barrett Fraser, who has a number of previous convictions but is now successfully pursuing a career in marketing, responded to the omnibus by asking “when do I or 400,000 other people stop being ex-offenders and start becoming citizens?  Isn’t society better off when ex-offenders are able to resume meeting their responsibilities in the community like I’ve done?”

 -30-

 For further information please call:

 John Hutton (and Barrett Fraser),

John Howard Society of Manitoba

204-775-1514 (315) or c) 204-612-4570

Jessica Dumas, Southern Chiefs’ Organization

204-946-1869

2…

2…

Bill C-10 Backgrounder

A coalition of Manitoba organizations is calling on Manitoba Members of Parliament to not support the proposed omnibus crime bill on the grounds that it does not create safer streets or communities and will create dangerous conditions in Manitoba jails endangering inmates and staff alike. 

The coalition is also opposed to so much legislation bundled together as a single bill so that most Canadians won’t fully understand the details of what their government is proposing to do, let alone how much it’s going to cost them.  Therefore the coalition will be commenting on the bill component by component with regular, weekly releases.  The first area of concern is the part of the bill dealing with changes to the pardon process (formerly C-23B).

As proposed, the omnibus bill would double the waiting period for most of those wanting to get a pardon, and make it impossible for anyone with more than three indictable offences to get a pardon, ever.  Given that under the current system, 96% of those receiving a pardon never re-offend there is no need to change the rules. In doing so the government is placing further obstacles in the path of those who are trying to live crime free lives.  Taking away the prospect of a pardon – ever, would be a major blow to hundreds of thousands of Canadians, who would be penalized in terms of finding employment, advancing their career and even volunteering in their child’s school as a result.  Last November, John Howard Society of Manitoba board member, Barrett Fraser, appeared in front of a House of Commons committee looking at these changes and asked “”when do I or 400,000 other people stop being ex-offenders and start becoming citizens?”  Rather than make us safer, the omnibus bill could make us unsafe if it prevents ex-offenders from becoming productive citizens.  Fraser, now a successful executive, tax-payer and home owner who has been living crime free for years, would not qualify for a pardon under the new rules as he was once convicted of more than three indictable offences.

Chris Courchene, another ex-offender told the same committee last fall, that he joined a gang at the age of 11 and spent several years in and out of custody as a young adult.  He is now living crime free and needs a pardon in order to complete his apprenticeship and support his family as a tradesperson.  He too would not be eligible for a pardon, should this legislation pass.

None of the proposals related to pardons in the omnibus bill have any direct benefit to victims.  For example there is no voice or role for the victim in the pardon granting process proposed.  The current law already contains a provision that requires the offender to show that getting a pardon would be in the public interest and anyone serving a life sentence is already prevented from getting pardon.

Denying a pardon to anyone who has even a single sex conviction which the omnibus would do in a number of situations is completely unnecessary from a safety perspective.  Even with a pardon, under the current rules anyone seeking to work or volunteer with children or other vulnerable persons will be red-flagged during a criminal records check if the offence was sexual in nature. 

Over three million Canadians have a criminal record for which they have not received a pardon.  Bill C-10 could keep tens if not hundreds of thousands from ever putting their past behind and significantly limiting their ability to support themselves and others. 

…3

3…

The members of the coalition opposing the omnibus bill, Bill C10, are

            BUILD Winnipeg,

            Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

Kenton Eidse, Employment Counsellor

Elizabeth Fry Society of Manitoba

John Howard Society of Manitoba

Initiatives for a Just Community

Ken Kuhn, retired Chaplain, CSC

Ogijiita Pimatiswin Kinamatwin (OPK)

Social Planning Council of Winnipeg

Southern Chiefs’ Organization (SCO)

I have been getting complaints about time frames recently. I have to be honest. Some are from my own clients.  But a lot are from clients of other companies. The problem right now is that, as a result of the Conservative crime policies, pardon applications are backed up quite severely. The two main challenges to processing a pardon quickly at the moment are the RCMP and the Parole Board. Courts and local police requests are about as inefficient as they ever were.

So here is my honest estimate of how long a pardon should take. This assumes that you are currently eligible for a pardon.

Our expedited service is currently taking between 8 – 12 months. In all truth 8 is not impossible but I would certainly not tell you to make plans based on it. And 12 months is not the maximum. You never know in the business when you will hit a snag with a local police station or a court house. But most of our expedited files are falling within those times frames.

Most of the pardon processing companies have some version of an expedited service. Some call it an express pardon. Some call it an accelerated pardon. You get the idea.

Expedited service in this business means we do it as fast as we possibly can. There are zero delays as far as in house processing and procedures are concerned. If you send us your fingerprints they get sent to the RCMP that very say day. When the prints come back your record is analyzed that day, etc. I want to make this point clear because some companies will claim they are able to “leverage” these agencies due to their extensive experience. This is a patent lie and any company selling you a service in this way should be avoided.

On the other hand our standard service is normally suggested for clients who are not currently eligible for a pardon. In these cases it normally depends on the client’s eligibility date. So if you start your pardon two years early your file will be prepared and ready to go the day you are eligible. In other words it will take two years plus whatever amount of time the Parole Board takes to review your file. You will save some money by being proactive.

If you are currently eligible and choose the standard service we will simply take an additional 6 months on top of the expedited time frames to process the paperwork. If you can give us a little leeway on the time, you will save some money. That’s how the expedited service works. We never claim to have any control whatsoever over the various government agencies involved in these procedures. Anyone who does is committing fraud.

The final thing to mention is that it is very possible pardons will soon become record suspensions. For the most part this is a symbolic name change but it is essentially what’s causing the current delays in processing a pardon application.

If you have any questions feel free to get in touch. I can be reached by email.

mashby@nationalpardon.org