Purser Law Blog

The New Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission

David Milgard’s Story  

David Milgard’s story is one of the worst miscarriages of justice known to Canadian law. Wrongfully convicted of first degree-murder in 1970, David Milgard spent 23 years in prison for the rape and murder of Gail Miller, a nurse from Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. When David was finally exonerated, DNA and other evidence revealed that Larry Fisher, a prolific sex offender, was responsible for the crime.

Throughout David’s time in custody, his mother, Joyce Milgard, maintained a steadfast belief in her son’s innocence. Her advocacy for the rights of wrongfully convicted played a key role in the establishment of the Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission, which will replace the existing system for identifying wrongful convictions.

The Current Structure  

Under the current structure, after someone has exhausted all of their rights to appeal, they may apply to the Minister of Justice to review their conviction. If the Minister of Justice finds that a miscarriage of justice “likely” occurred, they can order a new trial or an appeal. Once the matter is returned to the courts for a trial or an appeal, the judge will re-consider whether the evidence establishes the applicant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt 

This approach has faced criticism for several reasons. Firstly, with the Minister of Justice acting as the decision-maker, the government is responsible for reviewing its own actions to determine whether a miscarriage of justice has occurred. This raises concerns about the fairness of the current system. Secondly, statistics indicate that the existing system is not effectively identifying potential wrongful convictions, particularly among groups that are overrepresented in the criminal justice system, such as Indigenous peoples, women, and members of racialized or marginalized communities. Advocates and policymakers are concerned that these individuals are being overlooked and that the current system is failing to address wrongful convictions. 

The New Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission  

The new Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission consists of decision-makers who are entirely independent from the Department of Justice. This Commission operates with its own staff and, when necessary, external experts. 

Like the previous system, the new Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission is not an alternative to the courts. Applicants must first exhaust their rights to appeal before requesting a review by the Commission. However, the process for granting a new trial or appeal has changed. Instead of requiring applicants to demonstrate that a miscarriage of justice is "likely" to have occurred, the applicant now only needs to show that one "may have occurred" and that it is "in the interest of justice" to order a remedy. This represents a more flexible standard, which benefits individuals who may have been wrongfully convicted. 

In addition to these structural changes, the Commission will be given funding to raise public awareness about wrongful convictions and offer legal assistance to applicants who require support in submitting and pursuing a review. The key differences of the new Commission are its independence, proactive approach, and sufficient funding. 

Conclusion  

The new Miscarriage of Justice Review Commission, set to replace the current system, represents a positive move toward fairness in the criminal justice system. The lawyers at Purser Law have extensive experience advocating for the rights of accused people and are eager to practice before the new Commission. If you or someone you know has been wrongfully convicted, contact Purser Law today at 780-851-7435 for a free 30-minute consultation.