Three-time losers to face indefinite jail time under new bill

"It absolutely will act as a deterrent," Toews insisted. "It is not unconstitutional, we have considered it very carefully."

The most heated response came from Liberal MP Irwin Cotler, a former law professor and human rights crusader who held the justice portfolio in Paul Martin's government.

"It's the responsibility of a minister of justice - whoever that minister of justice is - to protect the Constitution," declared Cotler.

"It's not running to the head of a mob and saying 'Follow me'."

NDP justice critic Joe Comartin called the bill "a bit of an overkill" and said he has serious doubts that it would stand up to a legal challenge under the Charter.

"This is political posturing," said Comartin, predicting the bill has little chance of passing the Commons before next spring, when another federal election is widely expected.

Under the legislation, anyone convicted of three serious violent or sexual offences would have to convince a judge why he or she shouldn't be classified as a dangerous offender - a category that carries an indeterminate prison term under the Criminal Code.

In effect, the bill reverses the normal burden of proof for sentencing. It is currently up to the Crown to prove that anyone should be considered a danger to society.

The legislation, promised last week by Prime Minister Stephen Harper, has won applause from victims' rights groups and strong backing from the Canadian Professional Police Association, the lobby group for rank-and-file officers across the country.

But many defence lawyers, academic experts and civil libertarians say it casts too wide a net and won't necessarily guarantee the worst offenders are kept off the streets.

Neil Boyd, a criminologist at Simon Fraser University, noted that similar three-strikes laws in the United States have failed to reduce the crime rate.

"It catches the wrong people, puts too many people in jail and doesn't really deal with predatory violence," said Boyd.

"None of this (legislation) is empirically based, it's all kind of a populist appeal to the fears of Canadians."

The bill lists a dozen crimes, including assault with a weapon, assault causing bodily harm, sexual assault and attempted murder, as the kind of offence that would trigger a reversal of the normal burden of proof after three convictions.

But it also lists lesser and more ill-defined offences such as sexual interference, invitation to sexual touching and sexual exploitation.

The Justice Department says there are already some 360 inmates in federal prisons who have been classified as dangerous offenders and sentenced to indefinite terms.

Eighty per cent are there for sexual crimes rather than violent ones, and few are ever released once they're inside.

An additional 12 to 20 are added to the list each year under the current law, said department spokesman Chris Girouard.

Officials estimate that another 30 to 40 a year could be incarcerated if the amendments proposed by Toews are adopted.

The Tories have introduced a wide range of crime-fighting bills in recent months, including measures to impose mandatory minimum sentences for gun-related offences and moves to curtail the use of house arrest as an alternative to jail time for many other crimes.

Most of the bills are bogged down in the legislative mill, however, and there are questions about whether the minority Conservative government can mobilize enough support among other parties to make them law.

Some opposition MPs suspect the government's real aim is simply to prepare the campaign groundwork for the next time MPs hit the hustings.

"It seems their law-and-order agenda is just laying the bills on the table," said Liberal justice citric Sue Barnes. "I imagine we could be in an election before all of them are dealt with."

Read the full article here

Broken Link? If the link to the original article is broken or has been altered you can view the article by clicking here.