In some circumstances, and I am sure my friends in the Reform Party will agree, there are egregious cases in which people say no, there should not be automatic eligibility for parole after one third of your sentence. A section was passed in the Criminal Code which in part says: ``Where an offender receives a sentence of imprisonment of two years or more for an offence set out in schedule I or II to that act'', that is very serious offences, prosecuted by way of indictment, ``the court may, if satisfied, having regard to the circumstances of the commission of the offence and the character and circumstances of the offender, that the expression of society's denunciation of the offence or the objective of specific or general deterrence so requi
...[+++]res, order that the portion of the sentence that must be served before the offender may be released on full parole is one half of the sentence or 10 years, whichever is less''.
On a donc adopté une disposition du Code criminel qui est trop longue pour que je la lise entièrement, mais qui dit à peu près ceci: «Le tribunal peut, s'il est convaincu, selon les circonstances de l'infraction, du caractère et des particularités du délinquant, que la réprobation de la société à l'égard de l'infraction commise ou l'effet dissuasif de l'ordonnance l'exige, ordonner que le délinquant condamné à une peine d'emprisonnement d'au moins deux ans pour une infraction mentionnée aux annexes I ou II de cette loi, purge, avant d'être admissible à la libération conditionnelle totale, le moindre de la moitié de sa peine ou dix ans».
