Justice after R v Jordan

Around 800 cases have been tossed out across the country following the timelines set out by the R v Jordan decision three years ago.

In 2016, a Supreme Court decision came down that shook Canada’s criminal justice system. 

For years before this, criminal lawyers, victims’ advocates, and judges had been speaking out about how long it took and how complex it had become to prosecute a criminal case. In the case known as R v Jordan, the supreme court blasted the system   and all the players within it for what they described as a culture of complacency -- things were moving too slowly, and people caught up in the system - victims of crimes, as well as the people accused of crimes -- were waiting years for justice. 

The key message of R v Jordan was to push everyone working within the system to quote cooperate in achieving  reasonably prompt justice. The decision set hard time limits on how long it could take for a court to reach a verdict in a trial. And it left the legal community scrambling to meet the new deadlines.

Three years later, we’re checking back in. And what we’ve found is a number that one victim’s advocate called shocking.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Around 800 cases have been tossed out across the country following the timelines set out by the R v Jordan decision three years ago.

In 2016, a Supreme Court decision came down that shook Canada’s criminal justice system. 

For years before this, criminal lawyers, victims’ advocates, and judges had been speaking out about how long it took and how complex it had become to prosecute a criminal case. In the case known as R v Jordan, the supreme court blasted the system   and all the players within it for what they described as a culture of complacency -- things were moving too slowly, and people caught up in the system - victims of crimes, as well as the people accused of crimes -- were waiting years for justice. 

The key message of R v Jordan was to push everyone working within the system to quote cooperate in achieving  reasonably prompt justice. The decision set hard time limits on how long it could take for a court to reach a verdict in a trial. And it left the legal community scrambling to meet the new deadlines.

Three years later, we’re checking back in. And what we’ve found is a number that one victim’s advocate called shocking.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.