‘Honey let’s just keep the doors open’: A Critical study on the abrogation of spousal privileged communication in Canada and its implications in criminology

S. Vashishtha
{"title":"‘Honey let’s just keep the doors open’: A Critical study on the abrogation of spousal privileged communication in Canada and its implications in criminology","authors":"S. Vashishtha","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2865792","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The doctrine of spousal privileged communication existed in the common law and the Canadian law for centuries until it was abruptly abrogated in the year 2015 by the previous conservative government in light of the victims’ rights movement, without much debate or discussion in the parliament. Communications between spouses (and now partners) were privileged on the ground that they were so closely identified with each other than an aura of bias would surround any testimonial evidence they may present before a court against their partner, due to an inherent or vested interest in the trial. Until 2015, the reason this privileged communication was protected, with some limitations, was due to the preservation of marital harmony. Why was the preservation of marital harmony no more a social value in Canada? I argue that this unfounded and abrupt abrogation was unwarranted and since the same was done without any research, it will have long term implications in criminology. Therefore, this paper has three key aims, firstly, to explore the concept, meaning and the origin of spousal privileged communication in Canada and the commonwealth including the reasons behind safeguarding and fostering spousal relationships over other relationships. Secondly, the applicability and scope of spousal privileged communication in Canada pre and post 2015, i.e. Bill C-32 that abrogated spousal privileged communication in Canada. Chapter 2 will also address some key points that contradicts the intention of the legislature behind abrogating spousal privileged communication. Thirdly, the paper argues that the spousal privileged communication should have been retained, and draws upon evidence from criminological, sociological and legal realms to define four key reasons why this is so. This paper essentially calls for further understanding of the causal mechanisms that flow from the abrogation of this spousal privilege and for monitoring future outcomes through longitudinal studies.","PeriodicalId":418997,"journal":{"name":"International journal of criminology and sociological theory","volume":"69 4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of criminology and sociological theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2865792","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The doctrine of spousal privileged communication existed in the common law and the Canadian law for centuries until it was abruptly abrogated in the year 2015 by the previous conservative government in light of the victims’ rights movement, without much debate or discussion in the parliament. Communications between spouses (and now partners) were privileged on the ground that they were so closely identified with each other than an aura of bias would surround any testimonial evidence they may present before a court against their partner, due to an inherent or vested interest in the trial. Until 2015, the reason this privileged communication was protected, with some limitations, was due to the preservation of marital harmony. Why was the preservation of marital harmony no more a social value in Canada? I argue that this unfounded and abrupt abrogation was unwarranted and since the same was done without any research, it will have long term implications in criminology. Therefore, this paper has three key aims, firstly, to explore the concept, meaning and the origin of spousal privileged communication in Canada and the commonwealth including the reasons behind safeguarding and fostering spousal relationships over other relationships. Secondly, the applicability and scope of spousal privileged communication in Canada pre and post 2015, i.e. Bill C-32 that abrogated spousal privileged communication in Canada. Chapter 2 will also address some key points that contradicts the intention of the legislature behind abrogating spousal privileged communication. Thirdly, the paper argues that the spousal privileged communication should have been retained, and draws upon evidence from criminological, sociological and legal realms to define four key reasons why this is so. This paper essentially calls for further understanding of the causal mechanisms that flow from the abrogation of this spousal privilege and for monitoring future outcomes through longitudinal studies.
“亲爱的,让我们敞开大门吧”:一项关于加拿大配偶特权通信的废除及其在犯罪学上的影响的批判性研究
配偶特权通信原则在普通法和加拿大法律中存在了几个世纪,直到2015年,鉴于受害者的权利运动,上一届保守党政府突然废除了这一原则,在议会中没有进行太多辩论或讨论。配偶(现在是伴侣)之间的通信享有特权,因为他们彼此之间的身份非常密切,而不会因为审判中固有的或既得利益而在法庭上对伴侣提出的任何证词证据周围都存在偏见。直到2015年,这种特权通信受到保护的原因是,由于维护婚姻和谐,有一些限制。为什么在加拿大,维护婚姻和谐不再是一种社会价值?我认为这种毫无根据的突然废除是没有根据的,因为同样是在没有任何研究的情况下进行的,它将对犯罪学产生长期影响。因此,本文有三个主要目的:首先,探讨配偶特权通信在加拿大和英联邦的概念、含义和起源,包括保护和促进配偶关系高于其他关系的原因。其次,2015年前后加拿大配偶特权通信的适用性和范围,即废除加拿大配偶特权通信的C-32法案。第二章还将讨论一些与废除配偶特权通信背后的立法意图相矛盾的关键点。第三,本文认为配偶特权通信应该被保留,并从犯罪学、社会学和法律领域的证据来定义为什么这样做的四个关键原因。这篇论文本质上呼吁进一步理解从废除这一配偶特权流动的因果机制,并通过纵向研究监测未来的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信