Prolific offenders, bail, crime rates: BC Prosecution Service weighs in on public safety concerns

The head of the BC Prosecution Service has weighed in on the conversation swirling in cities around the province about crime and public safety, saying "the system is not broken."

In a statement released earlier this month, Peter Juk QC, who is also the province's assistant deputy attorney general, addressed a number of issues that have been the focus of debate and discussion, responding to what he describes as "recent criticism" of the criminal justice system and its efficacy.

"Politicians at all levels, along with some police officers, members of the public, and media outlets have voiced repeated concerns about public safety, 'prolific offenders,' and random acts of violence. This appears to have led to perceptions that the overall crime rate is up across British Columbia," he wrote.

Juk noted that these conversations are happening in the broader context of the overlapping crises of the COVID-19 pandemic, an unabated increase in toxic drug deaths, increasing homelessness, persistent housing unaffordability and a strained social service and mental health system. He also notes voters in municipalities across the province are set to go to the polls in October.

"When other sectors of society appear challenged or overwhelmed, citizens tend to look to the criminal justice system to fill the gaps," he wrote.

"Although it has a critical role to play and must inevitably be part of society’s response, the criminal justice system acting alone lacks the capacity, the tools, and the legal authority to remedy underlying social problems and to fill all the gaps left by other sectors of society."

After outlining the role of the BCPS and the legal standard for approving criminal charges, Juk turned his attention to the hot-button issues of "prolific offenders," the bail process, and crime rates.

'PROLIFIC OFFENDERS'

The term "prolific offender" is one that police departments, both municipal forces and the RCMP, across the province use when providing information about a suspect, often in the context of an arrest being made or a warrant being issued. However, Juk says the term is one that "has no clear legal definition under the Criminal Code and can mean different things to different people."

In every case and at each part of the process, Juk says, Crown counsel considers the "specific circumstances" of the case before them.

"This includes considering the background and history of the accused person or offender and the number and nature of all their previous criminal convictions," he writes.

Despite the lack of a formal or legal definition, the province announced it would be studying the issue of "prolific offenders" after concerns were raised by British Columbia's Urban Mayors' Caucus in April.

Defining the issues, the province said it would be probing both "chronic property crime" and "random violent attacks" and would be examining "shifting crime patterns that are particularly hurting downtown retail areas." The release of the findings was set for Sept. 2, but has been delayed.

The recommendations and a summary of the findings are set to be released this week. Two of the possibilities being examined are increasing electronic monitoring of people who are released from custody with court-ordered conditions and "compulsory programs" as an option that may "respond to the unique needs of this group of offenders," according to the terms of reference.

'CATCH AND RELEASE'

"Catch and release" broadly refers to a person who is arrested but not held in custody, often used to refer to cases where the person has a history of repeated arrests or criminal charges.

Juk took pointed exception to its use when describing the criminal justice system in British Columbia and Canada.

"Some have described the constitutionally and legally mandated law of bail as 'catch and release,'” he wrote.

"This phrase tends to undermine a basic principle underlying all enlightened criminal justice systems: respect for the humanity of all individuals, including those who are accused of crime. It also ignores or makes light of how fundamental, complex, and fact-specific the bail process is."

The risk that someone who is released may go on to commit other crimes is something Juk says is impossible to either predict or eliminate, and the right not to be detained or imprisoned is one that is constitutionally protected.

The right to "reasonable bail," Juk explains, is enshrined in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. But he notes that enacting the Charter did not mean this right was equally extended or guaranteed to all citizens. Among those held in custody, Juk says there have historically been an overrepresentation of those from "disadvantaged and vulnerable communities."

"Pre-trial detention tends to increase an accused’s risk of future criminalization. It also tends to increase the already unacceptable over-representation of Indigenous persons within the Canadian criminal justice system," he writes.

He also explicitly addressed the way that bail decisions are made in cases where addiction or mental health issues may be at play, saying Crown Counsel are specifically prohibited, by law, from seeking detention or using bail conditions to “encourage or enforce treatment”.

CRIME RATES

Next, Juk addresses the notion that crime is surging or skyrocketing.

"Some have claimed that crime rates are out of control and that the criminal justice system of British Columbia is 'broken.' This appears to have led some to believe that crime rates have risen drastically across British Columbia," he writes, adding that there has been an "intense focus" on random, violent attacks.

Citing a Statistics Canada report to back up the claim, he says the crime rate in B.C. is stable and "as low as it has been in many years." While there has been a "slight" increase in police-reported violent crime across the province over the past two years, Juk says that "is attributable primarily to increased reporting of sexual assaults."

He does also say that "some neighbourhoods have been suffering disproportionately from certain types of offending lately," but did not provide specific examples.

Juk' conclusion is that while the system may be imperfect, it is not broken. While he welcomes debate and scrutiny, he says his concern is that "public confidence can be undermined by uninformed or inaccurate public statements" and that he issued the statement because "the public deserves to receive the real facts."