

Tightening Bail in Canada: Will Bill C-14 Improve Safety or Deepen Inequality?
This blog examines whether the proposed Bill C-14 will improve public safety or deepen existing problems in Canada’s bail system. Governments have argued that stricter bail rules are necessary to address repeat offending and to help make communities safer, but others warn that creating tougher laws may undermine the presumption of innocence and create new pressures on the justice system. The main question is whether Bill C-14 will be creating reform that will protect the publ


Racial Disparities in Canadian Bail Decisions
Indigenous people in Canada are denied bail more often than any other group, despite bail being a constitutional right grounded in the presumption of innocence. This blog examines how the Canadian bail system disproportionately impacts marginalized communities, particularly Indigenous Canadian, and questions whether bail is truly applied equally for all accused individuals.


Protective Detention or Constitutional Problem? Bill 48 and the Section 7 Case Against Manitoba's 72-Hour Detox Law
In November 2025, Manitoba became the first province in Canada to authorize 72 hours of involuntary detention for intoxicated individuals, tripling the previous limit with near-unanimous legislative support. Bill 48, The Protective Detention and Care of Intoxicated Persons Act, passed through the legislature quickly, but the constitutional questions it raises will not resolve as easily.


The “Perfect” Victim: The Reliance on Demeanour Evidence in Child Sexual Abuse Cases
Several factors must be considered when assessing the credibility of a witness or victim during a trial, one of which is their demeanour. Demeanour evidence is behavioural observations made by either the trier of fact or jury during witness testimony. Triers of fact analyze a witness’s demeanour for sincerity and honesty in determining credibility.


Similar Fact Evidence and the Defence of Consent: A Principled Application of R v. Handy in R v. Cyrus
The admissibility of similar fact evidence presents a persistent challenge in Canadian evidence law, particularly in sexual assault prosecutions where credibility assessments are often central. Evidence of an accused’s other discreditable conduct is presumptively inadmissible due to the risk of propensity reasoning and the resulting moral and reasoning prejudice. Nevertheless, such evidence may be admitted.




