A ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada on Friday that strikes down “cruel and unusual” sentences for mass murderers gives concern to the families of victims, according to one lawyer.
Prior to 2011, anyone convicted of first-degree murder would be eligible for parole after 25 years, no matter how many people they killed.
The Conservative government of the time, led by Stephen Harper, made changes to the Criminal Code allowing judges to apply multiple life sentences together for people convicted of multiple murders.
But the Supreme Court struck down the changes in Friday’s ruling, determining that sentences without the option of parole are “intrinsically incompatible with human dignity.”
Saint John lawyer Kelly VanBuskirk said the decision puts previous life sentences without the chance of parole at risk due to offenders getting out of jail on parole sooner than expected.
That includes 32-year-old Justin Bourque, who is serving life in prison with no chance of parole for 75 years for the 2014 murders of three RCMP officers in Moncton.
For those families affected by similar mass shootings, VanBuskirk said it becomes difficult to see offenders reintegrated into society.
“The concern from a lay person’s perspective would be that the offender would still end up being entitled to parole and that’s a tough reality to come to grips with,” said VanBuskirk in a phone interview on Tuesday.
VanBuskirk said the Supreme Court’s ruling came after Alexandre Bissonnette, who killed six Muslims at a Quebec City mosque in 2017, went before the Quebec Court of Appeal to say that stacked sentences were unconstitutional.
The Crown later appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled in favour of Bissonnette.
The decision is retroactive to 2011, meaning 19 cases will have the option for parole applications. Prior to Friday’s ruling, VanBuskirk said nobody would have expected parole eligibility to become a factor.
“They were going to die in prison before they would even be eligible for parole consideration,” said VanBuskirk.
“Now it appears that they will be eligible, and the question then becomes whether or not the evidence at a parole board hearing points to significant or sufficient rehabilitation.”
VanBuskirk said while the new ruling now aligns with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it will still be difficult for people affected by mass murders.
He said any parole eligibility would depend on the evidence presented in each case.
