Policy Bulletin

Policy Bulletin 460

This policy update addresses the reinstatement of Accelerated Parole Review for offenders sentenced prior to March 28, 2011.

SUMMARY OF ISSUE

A recent Supreme Court decision (Whaling/Slobbe/Maidana) has reinstated the validity of Accelerated Parole Review (APR) nationally for offenders who were sentenced prior to the abolition of APR on March 28, 2011. Therefore, CSC may have ongoing new admissions of cases who meet the Accelerated Parole Review criteria in addition to reviewing those cases currently under CSC jurisdiction.

OVERVIEW

Accelerated Parole Review (APR), a parole review mechanism, was eliminated by the Abolition of Early Parole Act (AEPA) on March 28, 2011.

APR was available to non-violent offenders serving a first-time sentence in a federal institution. These offenders became eligible for accelerated day parole after serving the greater of six months or one-sixth of their sentence.

In November 2012, the British Columbia Supreme Court (BCSC), on appeal, ruled the application of APR abolishment should not be applied retrospectively to those offenders who were sentenced prior to March 28, 2011. The removal of APR eligibility for those offenders was deemed a violation of their rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This decision was enforced in British Columbia only.

In January 2014, there was a Habeas Corpus decision released in Quebec regarding APR based on date of sentence (same premise as the BCSC decision). As a result, APR was reinstated in Quebec for those offenders sentenced prior to March 28, 2011.

The Attorney General appealed the BCSC decision (2012) to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC). The SCC decision released March 20, 2014 dismissed the appeal and upheld the lower court’s decision with regards to the retrospective application and the violation of offenders’ rights.

Therefore, all offenders under CSC jurisdiction who are subject to sentences imposed prior to the March 28, 2011 abolishment date and who meet eligibility criteria will be considered for Accelerated Parole Review. 

In addition, on October 10, 2013, the British Columbia Supreme Court (BCSC) ruled that offenders who committed an offence before March 28, 2011, but who were sentenced on or after that date would also meet Accelerated Parole Review’s (APR) eligibility criteria. This decision is limited to the Pacific Region. 

As a result of the two different APR schemes in place, attention must be paid to those offenders released from BC on accelerated day parole. Should your office receive an offender on APR day parole who was released from BC, please consult your regional Sentence Management staff to confirm their continued eligibility for APR full parole. 

Considering the fact that CSC will now have ongoing new admissions of cases who meet the Accelerated Parole Review criteria, the following procedures must be adhered to for existing identified cases and newly identified cases:

ACTIONS REQUIRED

Intake Process

CSC is required to identify and flag APR cases in order to bring to the attention of the Parole Board of Canada (PBC) any offender who is subject to the Accelerated Parole Review provisions.

The Regional Reception and Assessment Centre will ensure that an APR review of all offenders is completed within seven days following admission to the institution in order to identify those eligible for accelerated review, in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision.

Following APR identification, an initial assessment regarding eligibility for Accelerated Parole Review must be documented in the Correctional Plan and the Criminal Profile Report.

The security classification and penitentiary placement report must take into consideration the eligibility of the offender for APR when assessing the escape risk and the public safety risk, and if and when the offender is being supported for release. 

Case Preparation

Accelerated Parole Review Offenders Serving 4 Years or Less

1. The intake Parole Officer will follow the general pre-release assessment process. Following completion of the intake assessment, the intake Parole Officer will request the Community Strategy from the proposed release destination.
2. The community Parole Officer will complete the Community Strategy to address the release plan identified in the Correctional Plan or Correctional Plan Update (CPU) within 30 days of the request.
3. The community Parole Officer completes the Assessment for Decision using the Content Guidelines that are annexed to this bulletin. Consultation with the Aboriginal Community Development Officer (ACDO) is required prior to finalization of the Assessment for Decision, when the release involves an offender applying for release to an Aboriginal community in accordance with section 84. When the same Parole Officer completes both the Community Strategy and the Assessment for Decision, the Community Strategy will be contained within the Assessment for Decision, using the Content Guidelines.
4. The institutional Parole Officer will ensure that any documents to be used in the decision-making process are shared with the offender and submitted to the PBC, along with a Primary Information Sharing Checklist (CSC/SCC 1199) or an Information Sharing Checklist Update (CSC/SCC 1197) and a completed Procedural Safeguard Declaration (CSC/SCC 1198), no later than two months prior to the day parole eligibility date and three months prior to the full parole eligibility date.

Day and Full Parole – Accelerated Parole Review Offenders Serving More Than 4 Years

5. The institutional Parole Officer will follow the general pre-release assessment process. The institutional Parole Officer will request the Community Strategy from the proposed release destination five months prior to the day parole eligibility date.
6. The community Parole Officer completes the Community Strategy to address the release plan identified in the CPU within 30 calendar days of the request.
7. Upon completion of the Community Strategy, the community Parole Officer completes the Assessment for Decision using the Content Guidelines that are annexed to this bulletin. Consultation with the ACDO is required prior to finalization of the Assessment for Decision, when the release involves an offender applying for release to an Aboriginal community in accordance with section 84. Where the same Parole Officer completes both the Community Strategy and the Assessment for Decision, the Community Strategy will be contained within the Assessment for Decision, using the Content Guidelines in Annex E.
8. Any documents to be used in the decision making process will be shared with the offender and submitted to the PBC, along with a Primary Information Sharing Checklist (CSC/SCC 1199) or an Information Sharing Checklist Update (CSC/SCC 1197) and a completed Procedural Safeguard Declaration (CSC/SCC 1198), no later than three months prior to the day or full parole eligibility date.

Timeframes

The timeframes for the APR case preparation are the following:

APR Offenders Serving 4 Years or Less

The intake Parole Officer must start the case preparation six months prior to the eligibility or review date.

The intake Parole Officer must complete the Correctional Plan and send it to PBC five months prior to the eligibility or review date. A Community Strategy (CS) must also be requested at this time.

Four months prior to the eligibility or review date, the community Parole Officer must complete the CS, and start the Assessment for Decision (AFD), or complete the CS/AFD and send it to PBC.

Three months prior to the eligibility or review date, the community Parole Officer must have completed the AFD and it must be sent to PBC.

Two months prior to the day parole eligibility and three months prior to full parole eligibility, the intake or institutional Parole Officer must complete the Primary Sharing of Information and/or Information Checklist Update and Procedural Safeguard Declaration and send the documents to PBC.

APR Offenders Serving More Than 4 Years

The timeframes are the same as for offenders serving less than 4 years. However, the complete documentation must be sent to PBC no later than three months prior to the day or full parole eligibility date.

Parole Board of Canada Reviews

For accelerated parole reviews, an initial review will take place in-office. In instances where parole is not directed, the case will be scheduled for a hearing with two Board members conducting the hearing.

Release Process

The release procedures are as follows:

• When day parole is directed, the offender is to be released on his/her actual day parole eligibility date, regardless of the day it falls on.
• When full parole is directed, the offender is to be released on his/her actual full parole eligibility date, or on the first working day thereafter when the parole eligibility date falls on a holiday or weekend.
• If the day or full parole eligibility date falls on a weekend or holiday, the Institutional Head may grant an unescorted temporary absence prior to the established parole eligibility date if the offender is eligible and if a delay in release would create undue hardship for the offender, or to accommodate Community-Based Residential Facility (CBRF) admission requirements, or to facilitate transportation.

Considerations

Information contained in the reports should include all offender progress and behaviour to date, as this may have an impact on the decision making process for APR. It is important that PBC have a complete, up-to-date assessment of each of these cases. Factors such as current institutional performance speak directly to the question of risk and should therefore be part of the rationale for decision.

The legislation as it is in force today, including C 10 amendments, should be applied on release and during supervision.

IMPLEMENTATION

Immediately.

NEXT STEPS

Information regarding Court dispositions and impact on policy will be made available as appropriate.

Contact:

Chris Hill
Director, Institutional Reintegration Operations
613-995-7954
Chris.Hill@csc-scc.gc.ca

Commissioner,

Original Signed by:
Don Head

ASSESSMENT FOR DECISION CONTENT GUIDELINES –
ACCELERATED PAROLE REVIEW

Purpose of Report

• Self-explanatory.

Risk of Violence

To assess this criterion, the following items must be considered. Integrate implications of psychological or psychiatric assessments, GSIR score, Elder’s Assessment if applicable and other actuarial information where appropriate.

• Stress factors likely to lead the offender to behave in a violent manner.
• Include Aboriginal Social History, factors include effects of residential school (offender as survivor or intergenerational effects from family’s historical experiences), sixties scoop, family or community history of suicide, substance abuse, victimization, experience in child welfare system, level or lack of formal education, level of connectivity or fragmentation with family/community, loss or struggle with cultural/spiritual identity, experience with child welfare system, experience with poverty, exposure or membership affiliation with gangs, etc.
• Information contained in psychiatric and/or psychological reports indicating the existence of a mental illness or disorder likely to lead the offender to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.
• The offender's propensity to violence as shown by:
  • any violent behaviour noted in the offender's file, young offender's file, provincial records, police reports and the circumstances surrounding the offence;
  • the seriousness of previous offences;
  • reliable information showing that the offender has problems controlling his or her anger to the point that it could lead the offender to commit an offence involving violence;
  • evidence that the offender uttered threats to commit violence;
  • use of a weapon during the commission of an offence;
  • an attitude of indifference toward criminal behaviour or the effects of criminal behaviour on victims. 
• Offender’s criminal history in the context of membership in an organized crime group or criminal gang.
• Attempts by the offender to reduce his or her potential for future violent behaviour.

Provide one of three possible conclusions supported by evidence

• In the absence of evidence of previous criminal behaviour involving weapons or violence and any indications of a propensity to violence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is likely to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.
• Although the offender has previously engaged in violent behaviour, given a specific set of circumstances (interval between previous behaviour and the present time, absence of similar behaviour, official documentation explaining circumstances of previous behaviour, sentencing related to previous behaviour), there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is likely to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.
• As developed in the analysis above, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is likely to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.

Proposed Plan

• Include an analysis and assessment of the offender's release plan, community management strategies proposed to address the offender's risk and needs, as well as the rationale for any proposed special conditions.
• For Aboriginal Offenders where possible discuss how the offender’s understanding of how he or she is in relationship to the four aspects of traditional healing might mitigate the risk and assist in the management of risk.

Dissenting Opinion

• Specify any differences of opinion and the underlying reasons.

Final Recommendation

• Indicate your final recommendation and any relevant details associated with it (e.g., duration, destination, special conditions).
• Include comments from all members of Case Management Team (including Elder’s and Aboriginal Liaison Officer) as appropriate.

 

COMBINED COMMUNITY STRATEGY AND ASSESSMENT FOR DECISION CONTENT GUIDELINES –
ACCELERATED PAROLE REVIEW

Purpose of Report

• Self-explanatory.

Risk of Violence

To assess these criteria, the following items must be considered. Integrate implications of psychological or psychiatric assessments, Elder’s assessment if applicable, GSIR score and other actuarial information where appropriate.

• Include Aboriginal Social History, factors include effects of residential school (offender as survivor or intergenerational effects from family’s historical experiences), sixties scoop, family or community history of suicide, substance abuse, victimization, experience in child welfare system, level or lack of formal education, level of connectivity or fragmentation with family/community, loss or struggle with cultural/spiritual identity, experience with child welfare system, experience with poverty, exposure or membership affiliation with gangs, etc.
• Stress factors likely to lead the offender to behave in a violent manner.
• Information contained in psychiatric and/or psychological reports indicating the existence of a mental illness or disorder likely to lead the offender to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.
• The offender's propensity to violence as shown by:
  • any violent behaviour noted in the offender's file, young offender's file, provincial records, police reports and the circumstances surrounding the offence;
  • the seriousness of previous offences;
  • reliable information showing that the offender has problems controlling his or her anger to the point that it could lead the offender to commit an offence involving violence;
  • evidence that the offender uttered threats to commit violence;
  • use of a weapon during the commission of an offence;
  • an attitude of indifference toward criminal behaviour or the effects of criminal behaviour on victims.
• Offender’s criminal history in the context of membership in an organized crime group or criminal gang.
• Attempts by the offender to reduce his or her potential for future violent behaviour.

Provide one of three possible conclusions supported by evidence

• In the absence of evidence of previous criminal behaviour involving weapons or violence and any indications of a propensity to violence, there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is likely to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.
• Although the offender has previously engaged in violent behaviour, given a specific set of circumstances (interval between previous behaviour and the present time, absence of similar behaviour, official documentation explaining circumstances of previous behaviour, sentencing related to previous behaviour), there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is likely to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.
• As developed in the analysis above, there are reasonable grounds to believe that the offender is likely to commit an offence involving violence before the expiration of the offender's sentence according to law.

Analysis and Assessment of the Community Strategy

• Notification to third party.
• Living arrangements: suitability.
• In the case of a Community-Based Residential Facility (CBRF):
  • Whether the CBRF has reviewed the background information;
  • Acceptance or rejection by the facility;
  • Availability of bed space and the proposed date accommodation will be available for the offender;
  • The profile of the current population and programs at the CBRF (only if the facility is not well known by the PBC);
  • CBRF concerns and suggestions for conditions and approaches to supervision;
  • Leave privileges (each case should be reviewed to determine if leave privileges can be granted in accordance with PBC policy. If so, this should be clearly stated. If the recommendation is to expand or limit privileges, a rationale must be included).
• For Aboriginal offenders, where possible discuss how the offender's involvement in traditional healing may mitigate the risk and assist in the management of risk.
• Employment.
• Community support.
• Comments from police.
• Proposed supervision plan, including the objectives and programs envisioned.
• Proposed special conditions: Justify whether or not special conditions are required and provide the rationale for the necessity of each proposed special condition.
• Level of intervention (frequency of contacts to be applied upon offender’s release to the community) (by completing Post-Assessment Level of Intervention within the Reintegration Potential Reassessment screen of OMS).
• Consultation with the Parole Officer in the institution (name).

Dissenting Opinion

• Specify any differences of opinion and the underlying reasons.

Final Recommendation

• Indicate your final recommendation and any relevant details associated with it (e.g., duration, destination, special conditions).