CANADIAN CRIMINAL CODE IS OUT OF DATE

The last major revision of the Canadian Criminal Code was back in 1954.

Since then, it has become appallingly out of date and in dire need of
a major overhaul.

Many of the laws are redundant, outdated, bewildering and even silly
with little thought for how they fit together.

Homosexuality is no longer a criminal offence provided that it occurs
between two consenting adults. Otherwise, it's a criminal offence
that carries a maximum 10-year sentence.

Did you know that it is a criminal offence to sell literature that
promotes drug use. This, I'm sure, comes as startling news to
thousands of librarians.

It's also considered a crime to possess or sell a comic book
consisting mainly of pictures of crimes whether fictitious or real.

It's criminal to claim a drug can restore sexual virility like Viagra does.

The Criminal Code prohibits the theft of more than 35 kinds of
property such as lumber, cows and oysters. Theft of this kind of
property is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

Maximum prison sentences are totally out of touch with public
expectations. Robbery, for example, carries a life sentence. It's a
sentence that judges almost never impose.

Possession of marijuana carries a maximum seven-year sentence. If
this law was rigidly enforced, half the country's population would
have criminal records.

Canada has only a handful of offences that carry a mandatory minimum
sentence that force judges to impose a minimum penalty no matter the
circumstances of the crime, such as the unjust and merciless 10-year
sentence imposed on Saskatchewan farmer Robert Latimer who took the
fragile life of his long-suffering daughter.

Criminal law continues to be written in a vernacular understandable
only to those who work in the legal profession. For example, what is
meant by "intent"? Is a person guilty of a crime if he/she didn't
intend to commit the crime? And what is meant by "criminal negligence"?

What about the phrase "beyond reasonable doubt"? Even judges can't
seem to agree on the meaning of this legal lollipop.

It's not the Supreme Court that is at fault for this mess. It's the
federal government that has been running awry.

Also at fault are the many criminal lawyers who are in no hurry to
see changes made. They understand the arcane system and are
comfortable with it. It's in their interest to maintain a
complicated, esoteric justice system that only they seem to comprehend.

Ed Ryan

Lethbridge