Time limits for trials were meant to speed up justice. They’ve also halted hundreds of criminal cases

The case of Melanie Hatton and Jeffrey Maclean in Kelowna, B.C., has shed light on the impact of the landmark Jordan ruling on criminal cases in Canada. Hatton, who was found covered in blood with her then-husband standing over her in an aggressive manner, expected justice to be served when Maclean was charged with assault causing bodily harm and resisting arrest. However, the case was ultimately thrown out in August 2023 due to delays in the trial process.

The Jordan ruling, established by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2016, set strict timelines for the completion of criminal trials to ensure defendants receive a timely trial. The ruling imposed a limit of 18 months for cases tried in provincial court and 30 months for superior courts, with breaches of these limits considered a violation of the accused’s Charter rights.

While the Jordan ruling was intended to speed up criminal trials and ensure prompt justice, its legacy has been mixed. Since the beginning of last year, over 400 criminal cases across Canada have been dismissed, stayed, or withdrawn due to Jordan challenges. These cases have ranged from sexual assault and child exploitation to drug trafficking and murder, highlighting the far-reaching impact of the ruling.

The case against Maclean, which was among those dropped due to delays, left Hatton feeling “an absolute pit of despair and shame.” Despite prosecutors attributing the delays to factors such as COVID-19 and the availability of Maclean’s lawyer, Hatton placed the blame squarely on the Crown prosecutor, stating, “this is on you.”

Critics of the Jordan ruling argue that it has not created the culture of urgency intended by the Supreme Court. Criminal defence lawyers like Stacey Purser and Kyla Lee have expressed concerns that the ruling has led to increased complexity and contentiousness in court proceedings, with discussions about Jordan becoming a regular occurrence in courtrooms.

The impact of the Jordan ruling has been felt across the country, with cases being dismissed due to delays in meeting the prescribed timelines. While the ruling has brought attention to the importance of timely justice, its implementation has faced challenges and criticism from various legal professionals.

As the debate over the effectiveness of the Jordan ruling continues, victims like Melanie Hatton are left grappling with the consequences of delayed justice. The legacy of the ruling remains a topic of discussion in legal circles, as stakeholders navigate the complexities of ensuring a balance between timely trials and the rights of the accused.