CHANGE TO THE LAW ON DRIVING PROHIBITIONS PUTS ONUS ON ACCUSED PERSON TO PROVE THEY ARE INNOCENT
On June 1, 2016 it became much more difficult for people who receive immediate 90 day driving prohibitions to win their reviews. Section 215.5 of the Motor Vehicle Act, as of June 1, now puts the onus of proving the case on the accused person! It is what some might call “common knowledge” that in our system of laws, accused people are presumed innocent until proven guilty by the state. This is not so with respect to 90 day driving prohibitions.
Previously, the police officer who served a person with a 90 days driving prohibition had the onus to prove that you had either refused to blow or that you blew a fail because you were over the legal limit. What “onus” refers to is the burden of proof. As the law had been, the police officer was the one who had to prove the case against you so it was said that the police officer had the “burden of proof”. This is now reversed and the citizen is essentially presumed guilty of being over the legal limit or refusing to blow. The accused person has to bring evidence that they are not guilty, even if the police officer’s evidence is fraught with inconsistencies and contradictions. The adjudicator (aka the government bureaucrat who acts as judge) who decides your case can simply say that he does not find your evidence compelling or that you did not explain something thoroughly enough and on that basis uphold your driving prohibition.
The review process has arguably become a rubber-stamping farce. It was not long ago that it became known that government lawyers were becoming involved int the review process and directing adjudicators to decide issues a certain way. Now the onus is on the person to prove their defence. When will it end?
The truth is, if you get a 90 day driving prohibition, you should feel lucky that you do not get charged criminally and understand that the review process for 90 days is designed so that upwards of 95+ percent of people who challenge their reviews will lose. However, Mr. van der Walle never loses his sense of fight and will potentially be challenging on constitutional grounds this highly questionable and plainly unfair new law. The legislators who passed this law have done every citizen of this province a disservice. Unfair laws strike at the core of notions of fundamental justice that our country and province claim to be built on. Contact Julian van der Walle today. Photo by ERiC.CHU 
Related Stories
Does drug addiction cause more crime?
As a whole, the Canadian justice system is very fair. The accused enjoy the right to be present and be heard in court, the right to remain silent, and the right to representation by legal counsel. That last right is one of the most important rights of...
Why You Should Hire a Kelowna Criminal Defense Attorney
As a whole, the Canadian justice system is very fair. The accused enjoy the right to be present and be heard in court, the right to remain silent, and the right to representation by legal counsel. That last right is one of the most important rights of...
Understanding Your Rights at a Roadblock
Roadblocks are a tool commonly used by the police in Canada to detect traffic infractions and alcohol violations on a large scale. In most cases, drivers will see roadblocks set up on major roads on holiday weekends or late at night around the time when...