COMM-1
CITY OF VANCOUVER
M E M O R A N D U M
FROM: City Clerk's Office DATE: January 24, 1997
FILE : 3253-1
TO: Vancouver City Council
SUBJECT: FCM Resolutions
The following FCM resolution has been submitted for Council's consideration, for the FCM Annual Conference in
June 1997:
Resolution Submitted by
(a) Warrant Radii Issued for Chief Constable
Criminal Code Offences
The deadline for submission of resolutions is February 10, 1997.
CITY CLERK
Att.
(a)
WARRANT RADII ISSUED FOR CRIMINAL CODE OFFENCES
WHEREAS many individuals, to avoid arrest and hence prosecution, flee the jurisdiction for which a warrant for their
arrest is in effect; and
WHEREAS the radius of a warrant for a particular criminal offence varies between jurisdictions resulting in an
inconsistent approach to law enforcement across Canada; and
WHEREAS the inconsistent radii of issued warrants for arrests results in costs not equitably being shared by issuing
jurisdictions and allow criminals to avoid arrest and prosecution;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Vancouver urge the Government of Canada in conjuction with all the Provincial
Attorney Generals, to commit to adopting a national policy for establishing warrant radii across jurisdictions and hence
ensuring a consistent approach to enforcement of the law.
Non-returnable Warrants
(Background Information)
Issue
Travelling criminals wanted on non-returnable warrants create problems and costs for the City of Vancouver. These
problems and costs are not restricted to Vancouver. However, the transfer of costs appears to be inequitable, with some
communities absorbing higher costs than others.
Background
In order for the police to arrest anyone there must be a statutory power of arrest. For a warrant arrest to occur, the
warrant must be in effect within the jurisdiction the police encounters the individual. Otherwise, the issuing agency
must extend the radius of the warrant to detain the individual. The multi jurisdictional nature of this issue is a
significant impediment, as cooperation between the different agencies has historically not been easy.
Typically, in issuing a warrant, Vancouver sets the largest radius than any other jurisdiction. The radius for a warrant
is determined by Crown Counsel after consultation with the police. Most indictable offences are set Canada wide and dual
offences are usually province wide. In comparison, many jurisdictions outside of BC will issue warrants with radii as
little as 200 km outside the issuing agency.
Costs
The cost of returning a person wanted on a warrant is absorbed by the jurisdiction issuing the warrant. It could be
argued that the costs associated to escorting those arrested outside the issuing jurisdiction is a large factor in
determining warrant radii. It also appears that many jurisdictions use non-returnable warrants as a modern form of
banishment. Many people wanted on non-returnable warrants continue to be criminally active outside the issuing
jurisdiction. This creates further costs to the communities.
Applicable legislation/regulation
Criminal Code of Canada - amend sections relating to powers of arrest and warrants (for example sections 495 and 514).
What s been done so far?
Crown Counsel and the Vancouver Police Department produced a radius guideline list for common offences. In most cases it
would be either BC wide or Canada wide. The Lower Mainland radius was eliminated. This has resulted in an increase in
waived charges.
cont'd
- 2 -
In a report submitted by a joint Federal/Provincial Task force examining trans-jurisdictional issues, recommendations
were proposed that the Criminal Code of Canada be amended to legislate a uniform response to mobile criminals.
What needs to be done?
A national approach to this problem is required. The federal government should give further legal authority to local
agencies regarding powers of arrest. It should also address the cost issue created by the imbalance in the number of
fugitives across provinces. A reciprocal agreement between the provinces is one solution. However, it would require the
federal government to take the initiative due to the historical lack of cooperation between the provinces on this issue.
In addition, a new offence of fleeing a jurisdiction to escape prosecution needs to be considered. It would help
eliminate the opportunity of avoiding prosecution.
* * * * *