B. Callender

The applicant sought a declaration that all of his concurrent sentences for multiple drug trafficking and proceeds offences were eligible for accelerated parole review (APR) despite the repeal of the APR regime on March 28, 2011.

Some offences occurred before the repeal date while others occurred afterward.

The court considered the interaction of s. 11(i) of the Charter with the repeal of APR and the authorities interpreting eligibility for offenders whose conduct straddled the repeal date.

The court held that although APR may theoretically apply to offences committed before the repeal, it could not be extended to later offences simply because they were sentenced together.

On the facts, the repeal did not increase the applicant’s incarceration period because the later offences independently required longer incarceration.

A federal inmate sought habeas corpus with certiorari in aid challenging his reclassification and involuntary transfer from a minimum security institution to a medium security institution.

The court applied the habeas corpus framework and held that the correctional authorities provided an adequate gist of the confidential information relied upon, while properly withholding identifying details of informants.

The court found no breach of procedural fairness because the applicant received notice, disclosure sufficient to know the case to meet, and an opportunity to make submissions, which he waived.

The transfer decision was also reasonable given the applicant's extensive escape history, intelligence indicating current escape planning, and the statutory priority of public safety.

The application was dismissed and modest costs were awarded to the respondent.