Don’t let police take away your right to self-defence 1:16 starts Castle law already exists in Canada, self-defence is legal- Lawyers Keep Lying Constitutional Rights

Castle law already exists in Canada, self-defence is legal
Despite what politicians, police chiefs and prosecutors want you to believe, Castle Law already exists in Canada and always has.

We’ve been having a debate about self-defence and castle laws in Canada over the past few months. Some are saying we need to pass castle law legislation while others say that’s not the Canadian way.

Both sides in that debate are wrong because a castle law already exists in Canada and is an ancient right under Common Law. It goes back to at least 1604 and a case in England decided by Sir Edward Coke, a judge and then attorney general of England.

“The house of every one is to him as his Castle and Fortress as well for defence against injury and violence,” Coke wrote. “But if theeves come to a mans house to rob him, or murder, and the owner or his servants kill any of the theeves in defence of himself and his house, it is no felony, and he shall lose nothing.”

That was passed on to Canadian law through the common law system and has never been removed.

Despite what some police officers, Crown prosecutors and media pundits will have you believe, you can defend your life, the life of others and your property. There are limits to this, but the law is clear even if the understanding of the law is not.

Solomon Friedman is a criminal defence lawyer and professor of law at the University of Ottawa. On the most recent episode of the Full Comment Podcast, Friedman outlined the depth of self-defence laws in Canada.

“Self-defence is absolutely legal in Canada. It is a full defence to a charge up to and including murder,” Friedman said.

“In fact, it is so serious of a defence that once the individual establishes that that defence is even remotely possible to use some legal terms here, air of reality, that it has an air of reality, the Crown has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that self-defence was not legally engaged here.”

The problem, Friedman said, is not with the law as it is written, but with how it is applied. He said too often there’s a take a “charge first and question later perspective” to self-defence cases.

Friedman said that if premiers like Ontario’s Doug Ford or Alberta’s Danielle Smith don’t want to see people charged in self-defence cases, they can make changes to the guidelines their governments issue to prosecutors.

“Policy is the problem. Parliament does not have to pass any laws,” Friedman said.

“What has to happen are the provinces who are responsible for the charging decisions of police. They need to amend the policy handbooks of the police services and of their Crown attorney’s offices.”

That’s a point that Brantford MP Larry Brock made when Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre promised Stand on Guard legislation designed to clarify the Criminal Code section on self-defence. Brock, a former prosecutor, said while Crown prosecutors are independent, they do take orders from the provincial government.

“They are still directed policy-wise by the attorney general,” Brock said.

Essentially, a solution to this issue is not just to pass a new law, but to apply the existing law differently. If provincial attorneys general issued directives to be more selective in self-defence cases instead of taking a “let the courts sort things out” approach, there would be fewer innocent people charged and put through what Friedman calls an arduous and gruelling process.

“The process is the punishment, both in terms of time, in terms of conditions, but also in terms of the stigma of being charged with a really serious criminal offence,” Friedman said.

To engage self-defence, Friedman said that you need a reasonable belief that force is being used, that your actions need to be defensive and your actions have to be reasonable in the circumstances. It’s that last part that Friedman says is the trickiest part; it can be subjective.

What should be clear to anyone who pays attention to the law or our history is that the right to self-defence exists. It is ancient and despite what Canada’s current federal attorney general says, exercising that right does not turn Canada into “the Wild West.”