There are certain types of criminal offences that require “specific intent” to commit them rather than “general intent.”
Figuring out which is which has taken decades of jurisprudence.
Regarding “specific intent” crimes there had been a defence of automatism for many years; basically that the accused was so “out of it” that he/she did not have the mental capacity to form “specific intent” and thus should not be convicted.
This, naturally, did not sit well with victims groups or indeed some judges, who had to deal with grievously injured victims and their families. As someone who practices in criminal law, I note how often intoxication of some type is factor that either causes the crime or makes it worse.
I am most concerned about spousal abuse and sexual abuse.
Thus, a section was added to the Criminal Code of Canada specifically removing this defence for voluntary intoxication of whatever type.
This section, as drafted, was recently struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada in a group of similar cases heard together as offending the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Fortunately, for victims and victim’s rights groups, the court did not forbid the concept of ever ousting the subject defence, they simply stated that the Criminal Code section as drafted was “too broad.”
Thus, expect something from the federal government relatively quickly to replace the impugned section of the Criminal Code.
The problem for many Criminal court participants will be the interim period; i.e. the time from yesterday until the new section of the Criminal Code makes its way through the Parliament and the Senate and gets signed into law.
Let us hope this is given top government priority.