The appellant, a federal inmate convicted of drug offences committed before the Abolition of Early Parole Act (AEPA) came into force but sentenced after, appealed the dismissal of his habeas corpus application.
He argued that the AEPA's abolition of accelerated parole review (APR) violated his s. 11(i) Charter right to the benefit of the lesser punishment.
Relying on the companion case of Canada (Attorney General) v. Lewis, the Court of Appeal held that the abolition of APR appreciably increased the appellant's incarceration time, constituting a variation in punishment that violated s. 11(i) and was not saved by s. 1.
The appeal was allowed, and the appellant was declared entitled to the APR regime.
