View Single Post
Old 03-11-2014   #40 (permalink)
beam-eye
aņejo
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,391
Very interesting, Nikky. Thanks for your knowledgeable post:

Quote:
Criminality
(2) A foreign national is inadmissible on grounds of criminality for

(a) having been convicted in Canada of an offence under an Act of Parliament punishable by way of indictment, or of two offences under any Act of Parliament not arising out of a single occurrence;

(b) having been convicted outside Canada of an offence that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an indictable offence under an Act of Parliament, or of two offences not arising out of a single occurrence that, if committed in Canada, would constitute offences under an Act of Parliament;

(c) committing an act outside Canada that is an offence in the place where it was committed and that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an indictable offence under an Act of Parliament; or

(d) committing, on entering Canada, an offence under an Act of Parliament prescribed by regulations.
For clarification of the wording of these Canadian regulations, which refer to an 'indictment' or an 'indictable offence', bringing an 'indictment' in the US requires a 'Grand Jury' decision to bring charges (as opposed to a prosecutor's office simply bringing charges on its own initiative). Does Canada have a 'grand jury' system that determines whether or not to indict (lay charges), meaning that the above regulations would apply only to that type of prosecution (i.e., by grand jury indictment, if there is a grand jury system), or is the term 'indictment' simply the catch-all terminology used in Canada for bringing (laying) any and all criminal charge by any means, whether by grand jury or by the district or state's attorney, meaning that all charges are initiated by 'indictment'?

DUIs for example, and possession of marijuana for personal consumption, and a host of other relatively 'minor' offenses are generally not considered to be 'indictable' offenses requiring the time or expense of grand jury deliberation, but are simply prosecuted by the District Attorney, or state Attorney General's office, and are thus not 'indictments' under the law. Just wondering if Canada uses a grand jury 'indictment' system, and if so, how the wording is interpreted in enforcing the regulations - e.g., someone prosecuted by a method other than by an indictment (i.e., prosecuted by the district or state's attorney, but not by grand jury indictment) would, based on the specific wording of the act, seemingly have grounds to contest denial of entry at the border on grounds that he had not been 'indicted' or that the crime was not an 'indictable offense'.

Last edited by beam-eye; 03-11-2014 at 05:06 PM..
beam-eye is offline   Reply With Quote