See more Toronto Sun on Google — save as a Preferred Source
No cash bail when you’re sprung from jail. That’s the ruling from a Trudeau-appointed judge who has blocked Ontario’s attempt to put teeth back into a revolving-door bail system.
Justice William Chalmers, appointed by Trudeau’s former justice minister David Lametti in January 2019, granted an injunction to stop any attempt at cash bail in Ontario.
The Criminal Lawyers’ Association and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association argued that requiring a security deposit from accused people granted bail violated federal jurisdiction and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Despite what we see on TV, in Canada, paying cash to get bail is rarely a thing. It exists in some cases, but it is rare, and the Criminal Code actually states that it is preferred if accused criminals are released on a “promise to pay” rather than paying before leaving jail.
That means that when you hear that someone is released on $10,000 bail, they didn’t actually pay $10,000 to be released. They just promised to pay it if they broke conditions.
Bail without consequences
The whole thing has become a joke because the Trudeau Liberals loosened bail conditions so much that bail became the default setting, even for serious and violent repeat offenders.
Someone would be arrested for a shooting or carjacking, released on bail with a “promise to pay,” then arrested and released again for another serious violent offence while already out on bail.
At no point did our justice system seek to collect the bail the accused had promised to pay.
Last fall , the Carney government enacted some mild bail reform but didn’t touch this issue. In Canada, the Criminal Code is handled by the federal government, but the administration of justice is handled by the provinces.
Doug Ford’s government in Ontario has been pushing for even greater bail reform and thought they had a workaround.
Under its legal changes, an accused could still be released on a “promise to pay” their bail, but under provincial law they were required to provide a security deposit at a provincial court within two business days of their arrest.
Failure to do so wouldn’t send them back to jail but would trigger a provincial offence carrying a fine of up to $5,000.
Bleeding hearts push back
The bleeding hearts who like to control our justice system balked at the idea that someone would be required to pay their bail in order to obtain freedom.
The groups argued the plan violated Charter protections including the right to a fair trial and the presumption of innocence.
These are ridiculous arguments given that judges already can, and sometimes do, impose cash bail on an accused. There was also no requirement that a judge impose a cash requirement, only that if they did, a security deposit be paid within two business days.
Still, Justice Chalmers granted the injunction and set aside the provincial law pending a fuller hearing in court.
“I am satisfied that there is a greater risk of harm if the injunction is not granted,” he wrote.
Same judge, same result
None of this should be surprising. This is the same judge who granted an injunction when the Law Society of Ontario was trying to stop Metrolinx, the provincial transit agency, from cutting down trees to build a subway line.
Metrolinx had gone through years of consultations, applied for and received every permit, and yet Justice Chalmers granted that injunction, costing the province millions in additional costs, with virtually no evidence.
Time and again, some of the worst rulings seem to come from judges appointed during David Lametti’s tenure as justice minister.
Our province and our country need yet more bail reform, and that is what the Ford government is pushing for here.
It doesn’t look like the Carney Liberals in Ottawa have a strong disagreement. It wasn’t them that challenged this.
Ontario is trying to restore consequences to a bail system that too often has none. Let’s hope the next court sees the difference.