 |
| John Hill |
Since his conviction, he has spent most of his sentence in a maximum-security penitentiary under incredibly harsh conditions. The justification given by the Correctional Service of Canada is that the CSC recognizes that his placement in a less restrictive environment could trigger the norm in the con code that sex offenders and child killers ought to be attacked, even fatally. Some would argue that his placement was for his own protection. It was simply state-sanctioned retribution for his horrible crimes.
Finally, the CSC recognized that he could function in a less secure facility and even benefit from programming offered in a prison other than Millhaven Institution. He was transferred to La Macaza Institution in the Province of Quebec, a facility that offers sex offender treatment.
The transfer enraged many who see penitentiary placement as a place for physical and even mental torture. “He deserves to suffer” is the way this group would justify harsh treatment even though it is against Canada’s law.
Our law provides that the only punishment available is deprivation of liberty, and even then, the Corrections and Conditional Release Act specifies that prisons should use “the least restrictive measures consistent with the protection of the public, staff members and offenders.”
The decision to transfer Bernardo was made without political interference and in conformity with the law. Prison officials deemed Bernard’s safety could be assured in a medium-security prison, and he should be encouraged to take rehabilitative programming even if the chances of a release are remote to non-existent.
According to a CBC report, four Conservative MPs and a Bloc Quebecois member want to politicize the transfer by demanding an emergency meeting on March 11, a day when The House of Commons does not sit to evaluate why “sadistic murderers are being left to enjoy freedoms and luxuries of lower security prisons.” Not only is Bernardo housed at La Macaza, but since 2022, the prison also holds Luka Magnotta, convicted after a high-profile trial found him guilty of killing and dismembering a 33-year-old Concordia University student, Jun Lin, in 2012.
Clearly, the enraged MPs are not so concerned with rehabilitation and public and staff security as they politicize an issue that will be a dog whistle for the “get tough on crime crowd.” The purpose of the meeting they are demanding is to delve into “how Justin Trudeau’s criminal justice system allows monsters like Magnotta and Bernardo to be freed from maximum-security prisons that they belong in.”
We have seen what tough-on-crime measures produce. Changing laws to include mandatory minimum sentences served to increase prison populations and expanded incarceration of indigenous and marginalized groups in society, leaving it for the taxpayer to foot the bill for increased costs.
At the provincial level, the Ontario Premier calls for a stacked judicial appointments committee to ensure that Ontario Court judges agree with the current government's thinking. Nationally, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is promising to introduce harsher prison sentences when he forms a government.
Making prison life harsher would increase the violence and endanger staff. Our prisons, even now, are dangerous places. There were five murders in Canadian prisons in 2021. According to Maclean's magazine, that means the homicide rate in prison is twenty times higher than in Toronto. Correctional officers had to use force more than 2000 times, and 60 per cent of the staff were subject to physical violence. Increasing prison populations will only make things worse.
Conservative MP Frank Caputo, who has been outspoken in his criticism of Bernard’s placement, is critical that Bernardo now resides in a prison with a well-equipped gym and a site for a hockey rink and tennis court. One would think that life inside a Canadian prison is like going to the spa. Yet according to the U.K. publication, The Mirror, Canada does not rank in the top ten in comfort amenities. We fall behind New Zealand, Austria, Spain, Switzerland, Germany, Sweden, Norway, and the Philippines.
The simple message to politicians is: If the CSC is obeying the law, butt out. If the law is to be changed, consider the cost to the taxpayer and to the safety of those prisoners and staff who are in our penitentiaries.
John L. Hill practised and taught prison law until his retirement. He holds a J.D. from Queen’s and LL.M. in constitutional law from Osgoode Hall. He is also the author of Pine Box Parole: Terry Fitzsimmons and the Quest to End Solitary Confinement (Durvile & UpRoute Books). Contact him at johnlornehill@hotmail.com.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada, or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.