Introduction
On March 12 2012, Harpers conservative government implemented omnibus bill that introduced many new mandatory minimum sentences (cbc,2012). As part of Harpers tough on crime agenda, the bill introduced mandatory minimum sentences for crimes such as drug trafficking, child exploitation and some other violent offences(cbc,2012).In accordance to their tough on crime agenda, the harper government has introduced so many new mandatory minimums sentence, to the point that we now have the second most mandatory minimum sentences in the world, second to the USA(Fine,2015). Since their introduction these mandatory minimum sentences have been debated heavily, with most people believing these mandatory minimum are unnecessary and are just increasing …show more content…
The first case was R.v. Smith and the second, more recent one was R.v. Nur. Both of these cases where very crucial in this case as the majority related upon these in making their decision. R.v. Smith was the first precedent setting case in which a mandatory minimum was considered unconstitutional as it was violating section 12([1987] 1 S.C.R).In R.v Smith it was established that the fact that mandatory minimums can be inconsistent with the proportionality principle but the mandatory minimums by themselves do not violate section 12([1987] 1 S.C.R).Furthermore R.v.Smith established a relatively high standard for finding a sentence that is a cruel and unusual punishment, it was established that it would have to be grossly disproportionate to the point where society wouldn’t find the sentence tolerable or just ([1987] 1 S.C.R). In order to come to this conclusion that the mandatory minimum sentences of drug trafficking do infringe section 12 , the majority in r.v lloyd relied upon on the two process test(the gross disproportionality test) used in R.v.Smith (was also used in R.v. Nur later).The two steps involved where that the court first “the court must determine what constitutes a proportionate sentence for the offence having regard to the objectives and principles of sentencing in the Criminal Code” and secondly “the court must ask whether the mandatory minimum requires the judge to impose a sentence that is grossly disproportionate to the offence and its circumstances” ([1987] 1
On March 12 2012, Harpers conservative government implemented omnibus bill that introduced many new mandatory minimum sentences (cbc,2012). As part of Harpers tough on crime agenda, the bill introduced mandatory minimum sentences for crimes such as drug trafficking, child exploitation and some other violent offences(cbc,2012).In accordance to their tough on crime agenda, the harper government has introduced so many new mandatory minimums sentence, to the point that we now have the second most mandatory minimum sentences in the world, second to the USA(Fine,2015). Since their introduction these mandatory minimum sentences have been debated heavily, with most people believing these mandatory minimum are unnecessary and are just increasing …show more content…
The first case was R.v. Smith and the second, more recent one was R.v. Nur. Both of these cases where very crucial in this case as the majority related upon these in making their decision. R.v. Smith was the first precedent setting case in which a mandatory minimum was considered unconstitutional as it was violating section 12([1987] 1 S.C.R).In R.v Smith it was established that the fact that mandatory minimums can be inconsistent with the proportionality principle but the mandatory minimums by themselves do not violate section 12([1987] 1 S.C.R).Furthermore R.v.Smith established a relatively high standard for finding a sentence that is a cruel and unusual punishment, it was established that it would have to be grossly disproportionate to the point where society wouldn’t find the sentence tolerable or just ([1987] 1 S.C.R). In order to come to this conclusion that the mandatory minimum sentences of drug trafficking do infringe section 12 , the majority in r.v lloyd relied upon on the two process test(the gross disproportionality test) used in R.v.Smith (was also used in R.v. Nur later).The two steps involved where that the court first “the court must determine what constitutes a proportionate sentence for the offence having regard to the objectives and principles of sentencing in the Criminal Code” and secondly “the court must ask whether the mandatory minimum requires the judge to impose a sentence that is grossly disproportionate to the offence and its circumstances” ([1987] 1