Private Prosecutions are a way private persons can lay charges against anyone, including “officials” of any kind, who are involved in wrongdoing (always have a legitimate complaint and evidence first). Often charges are not investigated or prosecuted by officials, against officials, so a private person can lay charges themselves.
Consider if you want to lay charges in Canada under the Criminal Code or under the Offence Act of your province. It is a different deal going provincial versus federal.
The receiving justice of the peace must receive the charges, if properly formed (an Information), BUT the Attorney General (AG) has the right to review the Information and take over the prosecution process or stay the charges if they find them improper in some way. If they do so you also have some recourse against the AG if they do so improperly.
Below is some information on the process of starting a Private Prosecution. Yes, you can.
Laws and Regs re Filing Private Prosecutions
- Public Prosecution Services Canada (PPSC) Private Prosecutions Manual – Pre-enquete – Section 507.1: https://www.ppsc-sppc.gc.ca/eng/pub/fpsd-sfpg/fps-sfp/tpd/p5/ch09.html#section_3
- New Brunswick Private Prosecutions: https://www2.gnb.ca/content/gnb/en/departments/jag/attorney-general/content/operational_manual.html
- Ontario – https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/private_prosecution.php
- Quebec Filing Private Information – Regulation of the Court of Québec (SI/2015-114): https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SI-2015-114/page-6.html
- British Columbia – Private Prosecution – Laying an Information in BC: https://www.courthouselibrary.ca/how-we-can-help/our-legal-knowledge-base/private-prosecution-laying-information-bc
-
- Offence Act, RSBC 1996, c.338 – BC Laws
- Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c. C-46 – Justice Laws
- Form 2 – Information, Offence Act – BC Laws
- Form 2 – Information, Criminal Code – Justice Laws Federal
BC References
Wikipedia – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_prosecution
Justice4You website – http://www.justice4you.org/self-represented-private.php
EXAMPLES OF PRIVATE PROSECUTIONS FILED
Recent case of Norman Traversy who laid a criminal complaint Information against Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada. Completed Form Link on Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/WhatsUpCanadians/posts/744003646013282?hc_location=ufi
FORMS FILED BY NORMAN TRAVERSY
- https://justiceforcanada.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/notice-of-hearing-added-charges-sept-12_2019-court-filed-document.pdf
- https://justiceforcanada.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/private-prosecution-document-to-use-as-your-template-to-file.pdf
- https://justiceforcanada.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/blank-private-prosecution-document.pdf
- https://justiceforcanada.files.wordpress.com/2019/09/private-prosecution-hand-book.pdf
Another Example of a filed Private Prosecution re GeoEngineering – COMMENCING A PROCEEDING FOR A PRIVATE INFORMATION UNDER THE CRIMINAL CODE OF CANADA – http://www.geoengineeringlawsuit.ca/pdfs/Information_Aug15_14_redacted.pdf
Federal Prosecution PPSC DESKBOOK on Private Prosecutions
New version: https://www.ppsc-sppc.gc.ca/eng/pub/fpsd-sfpg/fps-sfp/tpd/p5/ch09.html#section_3
Archived version: https://www.ppsc-sppc.gc.ca/eng/pub/fpsd-sfpg/fps-sfp/fpd/ch26.html
(Archived Version)
Part VI POLICY IN CERTAIN TYPES OF LITIGATION Chapter 26
26 PRIVATE PROSECUTIONS
26.1 Introduction
The relationship between the private citizen, as prosecutor, and the Attorney General, who has exclusive authority to represent the public in court, has been described as follows:
The right of a private citizen to lay an information, and the right and duty of the Attorney General to supervise criminal prosecutions are both fundamental parts of our criminal justice system.
The right of a citizen to institute a prosecution for a breach of the law has been called “
a valuable constitutional safeguard against inertia or partiality on the part of authority”. [BUT] However, this right can be abused. It is sometimes necessary for the Attorney General to intervene and conduct or stay the prosecution to prevent the harms that may flow from such prosecutions, for example: 1) the harm suffered by a defendant who is factually innocent; 2) the harm to the court system caused by a frivolous prosecution.This chapter explains the law on initiating and conducting private prosecutions. It also explains when the Attorney General of Canada may and should intervene either to conduct or stay such prosecutions.
DONICH LAW summary of private prosecution (no endorsement just a reference)
File Provincial Offence Act or Federal Criminal Code??? Read the full section but here is an excerpt.
2. Authority of the Attorney General of Canada to Intervene in Private Prosecutions
The DPP exercises the authority of the Attorney General of Canada respecting private prosecutions, including the authority to intervene and assume the conduct of – or direct the stay of – such prosecutions by virtue of s. 3(3)(f) of the Director of Public Prosecutions Act.
…
As already noted, the s. 2 definition limits the Attorney General of Canada’s authority to prosecute offences under non-Criminal Code federal statutes to proceedings that are commenced at the instance of the federal government. This does not cover private prosecutions in the provinces because such proceedings are not “commenced at the instance of the Government of Canada”. Nonetheless, the DPP has full authority to intervene in private prosecutions commenced under federal statutes other than the Criminal Code – either for the purpose of conducting or staying the proceedings – where the relevant provincial Attorney General has not intervened.
https://www.ppsc-sppc.gc.ca/eng/pub/fpsd-sfpg/fps-sfp/tpd/p5/ch09.html#section_2
When completing an “Information” these are reasonable guidelines as provided in British Columbia Offence Act. Check your local jurisdiction for similar info:
OFFENCE ACT [RSBC 1996] CHAPTER 338
http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/96338_01#section97
Originating document must contain substance of evidence
96 (1)An information, complaint, warrant, conviction or other proceeding under this Act must in general apply to a single transaction, and must contain, and is sufficient if it contains in substance, a statement that the defendant committed an offence or act specified in the proceeding and punishable on summary conviction.
(2)The statement referred to in subsection (1) may be
(a)in popular language without technical averments or allegations of matters that are not essential to be proved,
(b)in the words of the enactment that describes the offence or declares the matters charged to be an offence or act punishable on summary conviction, or
(c)in words that are sufficient to give to the defendant notice of the offence with which the defendant is charged.
(3)An information must contain sufficient detail of the circumstances of the alleged offence to give to the defendant reasonable information with respect to the act or omission to be proved against the defendant and to identify the transaction referred to, but otherwise the absence or insufficiency of details does not vitiate the information.
(4)An information may refer to any section, subsection, paragraph, subparagraph or clause of the enactment that creates the offence charged, and for determining whether an information is sufficient, consideration must be given to any such reference.
(5)Nothing in this Act relating to matters that do not render an information insufficient is deemed to restrict or limit the application of this section.
Information sufficient despite certain omissions
97 (1)No information, complaint, warrant, conviction or other proceeding under this Act is insufficient because of the absence of details if, in the opinion of the justice, the information otherwise fulfills the requirements of section 96.
(2)Without restricting subsection (1), no information is insufficient merely because it fails to
(a)name the person injured or intended or attempted to be injured,
(b)name the person who owns or has a special property or interest in property mentioned in the information,
(c)specify the means by which the alleged offence was committed,
(d)name or describe with precision any person, place or thing, or
(e)if the consent of a person, official or authority is required before proceedings may be instituted for an offence, state that the consent has been obtained.
(3)The justice may, if satisfied that it is necessary for a fair trial, order that a particular, further describing any matter relevant to the proceedings, be furnished to the defendant.
Burden on defendant to prove an exception
98 (1)No exception, exemption, proviso, excuse or qualification prescribed by law is required to be set out or negatived in an information.
(2)The burden of proving that an exception, exemption, proviso, excuse or qualification prescribed by law operates in favour of the defendant is on the defendant, and the prosecutor is not required, except by way of rebuttal, to prove that the exception, exemption, proviso, excuse or qualification does not operate in favour of the defendant, whether or not it is set out in the information.
(3)If it appears that the defendant has done any act or been guilty of any omission for which, were the defendant not licensed or registered or authorized by a consent, permit, certificate or otherwise, he or she would be liable to a penalty, the defendant must prove that he or she is licensed or registered or authorized by a consent, permit, certificate or otherwise.
Process not objectionable on other grounds
99 No information, summons, conviction, order or process is deemed to charge 2 offences or to be uncertain merely because it states that the alleged offence was committed
(b)in respect of one or other of several articles, either conjunctively or disjunctively.
Amending defective information
100 (1)An objection to an information for a defect apparent on its face must be made by motion to quash the information before the defendant has pleaded, and after that only by leave of the justice before whom the trial takes place.
(2)A justice may, on the trial of an information, amend the information or a particular furnished under section 97 (3) to make the information or particular conform to the evidence if there appears to be a variance between the evidence and
(a)the charge in the information, or
(b)the charge in the information
(ii)as it would have been if amended in conformity with any particular furnished under section 97 (3).
(3)A justice may, at any stage of the trial, amend the information as may be necessary if it appears
(i)fails to state or states defectively anything that is required to constitute the offence,
(ii)does not negative an exception that should be negatived, or
(iii)is in any way defective in substance,
and the matters to be alleged in the proposed amendment are disclosed by the evidence taken on the trial, or
(b)that the information is in any way defective in form.
(4)A variation between the information and the evidence taken on the trial is not material with respect to
(a)the time when the offence is alleged to have been committed, if it is proved that the information was laid within the prescribed period of limitation, or
(b)the place where the subject matter of the proceedings is alleged to have arisen, if it is proved that it arose in the territorial jurisdiction of the justice who holds the trial.
(5)The justice must, in considering whether or not an amendment should be made, consider
(a)the evidence taken on the trial, if any,
(b)the circumstances of the case,
(c)whether the defendant has been misled or prejudiced in his or her defence by a variance, error or omission mentioned in subsection (2) or (3), and
(d)whether, having regard to the merits of the case, the proposed amendment can be made without injustice being done.
(6)If, in the opinion of the justice, the defendant has been misled or prejudiced in his or her defence by an error or omission in the information, the justice may adjourn the trial, and may make an order for the payment of costs resulting from the necessity of amendment as the justice considers desirable.
