CANADA’S top court ruled that extreme intoxication may be used as a defence at trial for violent crimes, saying a ban on such pleadings – supported by women’s advocacy groups – is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court in its decision considered the cases of three men who, after voluntarily consuming drugs, were involved in beatings, stabbings, and even one homicide.

The men, at separate trials, argued that the drugs left them in a state of “automatism”, meaning they were so impaired they lost complete control.

One took an overdose of prescription drugs and attacked his mother with a knife, badly injuring her.

Another took psilocybin, commonly known as “magic mushrooms”, and killed his father, while the third broke into a stranger’s house and assaulted a woman who lived there.

Ottawa prohibited the extreme intoxication defence in 1995, after a public backlash over its use at the trial of a man who sexually assaulted a woman in a wheelchair.

Justice Nicholas Kasirer wrote for the top court in one of the three recent cases that the federal law allowing the defence undermines “core beliefs” of the criminal law system: intent, and the presumption of innocence.

And it runs the risk of wrongful convictions, he said.

“It enables conviction for conduct that an accused person was not aware of and could not control and therefore cannot be a ‘guilty act’ as defined by the underlying offences.

“This result follows even where individuals ingest alcohol or drugs in common‑place situations, where there is no objective or subjective foresight of automatism or violence.”

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association, Empowerment Council and Women’s Legal and Action Fund argued before the top court against allowing the defence. – AFP, May 14, 2022.