This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
This is a single
speech (house debate) resource
from the openparliament.ca API. If you’re new here, you might want to look at the documentation. If API and JSON are gibberish to you, you’re better off at our main site.
{
"time": "2007-03-23 12:10:00",
"attribution": {
"en": "Ms. Penny Priddy",
"fr": ""
},
"content": {
"en": "<p data-HoCid=\"511375\" data-originallang=\"en\">Mr. Speaker, I understand it is a tenet of our legal system but we have as a society and as a government decided in a number of other circumstances where people's lives are at risk that reverse onus can play a role. That has been upheld.</p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"511376\" data-originallang=\"en\">That is why I said in my earlier comments that this needs to be tracked very carefully and the results of it reviewed. Any time we move into a reverse onus situation, we have to be very careful that it is not abused. There are at least four or five other examples of where reverse onus is used in order to protect, not from some unlikely threat, but to protect from a very likely threat that violence will happen again. In these circumstances both Parliament and the courts have upheld that.</p>",
"fr": "<p data-HoCid=\"511375\" data-originallang=\"en\">Monsieur le Pr\u00e9sident, je comprends que ce principe est \u00e0 la base de notre syst\u00e8me juridique, mais, en tant que soci\u00e9t\u00e9 et que gouvernement, nous avons d\u00e9cid\u00e9 que l'inversion du fardeau de la preuve peut \u00eatre indiqu\u00e9 dans certains cas o\u00f9 la vie des Canadiens est en danger. Ce principe a \u00e9t\u00e9 admis. </p>\n<p data-HoCid=\"511376\" data-originallang=\"en\">C'est la raison pour laquelle j'ai affirm\u00e9 plus t\u00f4t que nous devions surveiller cette situation de pr\u00e8s et revoir les r\u00e9sultats obtenus. Chaque fois que nous autorisons l'inversion du fardeau de la preuve, nous devons \u00eatre tr\u00e8s vigilants pour nous assurer qu'il n'y a pas d'abus. Il y a au moins quatre ou cinq situations o\u00f9 l'inversion du fardeau de la preuve peut \u00eatre justifi\u00e9e. Ce sont des cas o\u00f9 la menace de violence, loin de rester vague, devient tr\u00e8s probable. Dans de telles circonstances, le Parlement et les tribunaux ont reconnu la pertinence de cette mesure. </p>"
},
"url": "/debates/2007/3/23/penny-priddy-8/",
"politician_url": "/politicians/450/",
"politician_membership_url": "/politicians/memberships/545/",
"procedural": false,
"source_id": "1976313",
"h1": {
"en": "Government Orders",
"fr": ""
},
"h2": {
"en": "Criminal Code",
"fr": ""
},
"document_url": "/debates/2007/3/23/",
"related": {
"document_speeches_url": "/speeches/?document=%2Fdebates%2F2007%2F3%2F23%2F"
}
}