BETTER OPTIONS THAN DRACONIAN THREE-STRIKES LAW

Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants opposition parties to help his
government push through tough new measures to keep violent criminals
behind bars longer.

Harper is proposing a three-strikes-you're-out system. Anyone
convicted of a third violent crime would have to prove to a judge why
they should ever get out of prison.

Under the current system, Crown prosecutors must prove to the court
why a criminal should be declared a danger to society and therefore
held in jail indefinitely. It is generally reserved for the worst of
violent criminals and repeat offenders.

There's good reason for the existing approach. The justice system is
built on the principle of innocence until guilt is proven, and that
puts the onus on the Crown to prove the case -- or with dangerous
offenders, to prove why the punishment should carry on indefinitely.

Reversing that onus, as Harper would do, raises serious concerns
because it goes against that fundamental principle of justice.

Even if these are the worst criminals, the Crown should still have to
prove its case.

There are cases when it is justifiable to designate a dangerous
offender after one or two terrible crimes. But if the new benchmark
is three strikes, Crown prosecutors may be tempted to wait for the
third strike.

That's the downside of applying rigid rules in a justice system where
judicial discretion plays an important role in deciding the fate of
individuals.

Harper's message about making Canada safer certainly has appeal. But
does this three-strikes approach actually achieve that end?

This draconian approach in California has clogged that state's prison
system with people convicted three times of any felony, whether it's
shoplifting or murder. And it didn't lower the crime rate any faster.

The dangerous-offender proposals go hand in hand with another
get-tough-on-crime policy, mandatory-minimum sentences for certain
crimes. The combination means more criminals will spend more time in
jail. Is the prison system is ready for the influx?

Alberta's Ron Stevens argued for stricter enforcement of probation
violations for released prisoners and the assigning of
dangerous-offender status to the most dangerous criminals as soon as
they breach their probation. Those measures are also worth considering.