Anthony Antonacci PPAL 6100 March 24, 2012

 The Facts:  David Edwin Oakes was found in possession of 8 vials of hashish oil and $ and was charged with unlawful possession of a narcotic for the purposes of trafficking under s. 4(2) of the Narcotic Control Act  Following s.8 of the Narcotic Control Act that places a “reverse onus” on the defendant to prove that they did not intend to traffic if found in possession of narcotics, the trial judge found that Oakes did not sufficiently prove that an intention did not exist and therefore he was guilty  Oakes challenged this ruling on the basis of the s. 11(d) Charter right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty

 The Supreme Court said:  s. 8 of the Narcotic Control Act is in violation of s. 11(d) of the Charter  Why? Because it forces the accused to disprove a presumed fact without allowing for reasonable doubt  However, Justice Brian Dickson acknowledged that rationally connecting a presumed fact to a basic fact is a fair way to justify a law under s. 1 of the Charter

 The Supreme Court said:  Thus, the ever important “Oakes test” for determining if a law is valid under s. 1 of the Charter was born  In order for a law to be considered a reasonable limit of a Charter right, two criteria must be met: ▪ The law must have a pressing and substantial objective ▪ The means used in the law to achieve the objective must be proportional to the objective, meaning: ▪ It rationally achieves the objective ▪ It impairs the right as little as possible ▪ The costs are proportional to the benefits

 This case was especially important for three reasons:  Explicitly articulated how our rights can be legally limited  Created a precedent which has been used in countless cases since  Contributed greatly to the politicization of the judiciary since the Oakes test asks judges to evaluate the merits of legislation

 Questions:  What is the most political part of the Oakes test – whether the objective of a law is pressing and substantial, or whether the costs of a law weigh less than its benefits?  Does the Oakes test mean that those who argue that the court unfairly infringes upon the decisions of our elected officials are right?