The Supreme Court of Canada rules that lifetime and mandatory registration on the Sex Offender Register are unconstitutional.
Canada’s mandatory and perpetual inclusion on the sex offenders registry has been ruled illegal by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Justices Andromache Karakatsanis and Sheilah L. Martin, writing for the majority of the judges, claimed in the case R. v. Ndhlovu, 2022 SCC 38 [Supreme Court Of Canada created by the Supreme Court’s communications staff that two Criminal Code provisions violate section 7 of the Charter in a way that cannot be justified in a free and democratic society.
FACTS OF THE CASE :
In accordance with the Sex Offender Information Registration Act, the nation’s national sex offender registry was established in 2004. (SOIRA). Prior to 2011, the prosecution had to request a judge’s approval before a name could be added on the registry.
Since the modification, anybody found guilty of a sexual offense was forced to register by law under Section 490.012 of the Criminal Code. For those who committed many offenses, Section 490.013(2.1) additionally established a mandatory registration requirement for life.
Because registration “has a severe influence on the freedom of movement and of fundamental choices of people who are not at an enhanced risk of re-offending,” the judges concluded that these requirements violate the right to liberty guaranteed by section 7 of the Charter.
Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person, and the right not to have those rights violated, unless doing so would violate fundamental justice principles, as stated in Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The majority ruled that the clauses violated the constitution. “They stated that after a year, section 490.012 will be declared invalid. Section 490.013(2.1) is found to be invalid immediately and is regarded as such from the time it was implemented in 2011 “the SC communications team stated.
Eugene Ndhlovu, who in 2015 pleaded guilty to two charges of sexual assault against two people at a party when he was 19 years old, had contested the legality of Sections 490.012 and 490.013(2.1). He was given a six-month prison term, and his name was automatically posted to the federal database of sex offenders.
JUDGEMENT REVIEW BY SREYA MARY.