Written Submissions are not a Replacement for Oral Submissions
It is common practice in the criminal courts to require written
submissions, not only at the end of the evidence in judge alone cases, but also
in respect of various evidentiary motions, or pre-charge discussions held
before or during trial. In those cases, written argument is used, not in
lieu of oral argument, but in addition to and usually as a precursor to oral
argument.
If a trial judge requires arguments to be made by written submissions,
the trial judge must allow counsel, after written argument has been exchanged,
to make oral arguments in the presence of the accused to supplement, correct,
or otherwise amplify the written argument. Procedural fairness and the
accused’s right to be present throughout his/her trial require this. [FN]
R. v.
McDonald, 2018 ONCA 369, at paras. 46, 47.
Counsel, however, may agree to waive oral argument either entirely
or as a supplement to written argument.
Ibid., at para 46.
[FN]: Section 650 of the Criminal Code gives the accused
the right to be present in court during the whole of his trial subject to
exceptions. Closing arguments are part of an accused's trial. Procedural
fairness speaks to the principle that persons affected by the proceedings
should have the opportunity: (i) to present their case fully and fairly, and
(ii) have any decision affecting their rights, interests, or privileges made
using a fair, impartial and open process: see Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship & Immigration), [1999] 2 S.C.R. 817.
Stuart O’Connell, O’Connell
Law Group, www.leadersinlaw.ca (All
rights reserved to author).
Comments
Post a Comment