:i: inm)R(imj:nt 



engages lawyers in pnvate practice m the kicality where 

 the trial is to be held. 



Names o\' private practitioners who are available to 

 prosecute (isheries i>tl'ences are supplied by the IX-part- 

 ment of" Justice, apparently without regard to whether the 

 lawyers have experience in prosecuting in that field. The 

 Department of f'lshenes and Oceans has no intluencc in 

 the choice of names that appear on the list. 



Department ot Justice staff lawyers handle some pro- 

 secutions, particularly those in larger centres such as 

 Vancouver. They also prosecute many offences against 

 the habitat protection and deleterious substance provi- 

 sions of the Fisheries Act elsewhere in the region. 



The Department of Fisheries and Oceans carnes out 

 some informal training of prosecutors in the different 

 regions by familiarizing them with vessels, fishing gear 

 and so on. TTie Department also employs a court liaison 

 officer for fishenes prosecutors, whose main activity is 

 disseminating recent decisions and applicable law to 

 fisheries prosecutors throughout the region. 



The quality of fisheries prosecutions depends on the 

 availability of lawyers who have a high level of legal skill 

 and a specialized knowledge of the resource. Ideally, the 

 prosecutor should be available to the investigators 

 throughout an investigation to answer questions that 

 might arise about the evidence required to lay a charge, 

 whom to proceed against and the choice and wording of 

 the charge. The same prosecutor should then be available 

 to take the case to court and follow through until it has 

 been disposed of 



However, the Department has had difficulty in obtain- 

 ing and maintaining prosecutors with the necessary time 

 and skills for two reasons. First, a change in government 

 usually produces a change in the appointment of the pri- 

 vate lawyers who are to perform fishery prosecutions. It is 

 a regrettable fact of political life that the federal govern- 

 ment typically appoints lawyers who are sympathetic to 

 the party in power. Thus, the Department is often unable 

 to retain lawyers that they know could do a good job in 

 prosecuting a case because their names have been taken 

 off the list supplied by the Department of Justice. They 

 have pressed the issue with the Department of Justice, 

 but with no success: 



The response is that you have to live with the 

 system that's in place, and we've had no co- 

 operation in getting the Department of Jus- 

 tice to push for us in terms of getting a lawyer 

 that we know is competent in a certain field. 

 While he may be outside of the political sys- 

 tem in terms of appointment of Crown coun- 

 sels, he may have been available a few years 

 back under another government, but I know 

 we've tried and haven't (had) any success.'^ 



Second, lawyers in the Department of Justice who are 

 assigned to fisheries cases are often young and relatively 

 inexperienced counsel. As they gam more experience, 

 many of them leave the Department to go into private 

 practice. The result is that fisheries personnel, having 

 expended time and efibrt in acquainting a prosecutor 

 with the peculiar problems of the fishery resource, are 

 often faced with having to start this training process all 

 over again with a new prosecutor. 



I recommend that the current arrangements be 

 changed as follows: 



10. The DepartnK>nt «»f Jasfice should designate a senior 

 staff lawyer in its Vancouver regional office to oversee 

 all prosecutions under the Fisheries Act. 



He would be available for consultation and advice to 

 fisheries investigating officers and prosecutors throughout 

 the Pacific region, to take test ca.ses to courts, to review 

 appropriate cases for appeal and take them to appeal, to 

 implement uniform practices throughout the region, to 

 ease problems with evidence, and generally to increase 

 the quality of fisheries prosecutions. He should also be 

 available to assist the Pacific region in formulating and 

 drafting regulations to shorten delays in enacting them, 

 and to ensure that they will be enforceable in court. This 

 individual would be better situated in the Department of 

 Justice than as an internal Department of Fisheries and 

 Oceans counsel, since his association with other Justice 

 Department lawyers would keep him abreast of current 

 developments in the law and give him a clear perspective 

 of the way fisheries prosecutions fit into the administra- 

 tion of justice generally. 



11. In consultation with the Department of Justice, the 

 Department of Fisheries and Oceans should have the 

 power to choose and appoint the lawyers who will act 

 as prosecutors imder the Fisheries Act and regula- 

 tions. 



This would allow the most experienced and competent 

 practitioners to be appointed regardless of their political 

 affiliation. The appointment of senior high profile lawyers 

 to conduct fishery prosecutions would also provide a 

 means of indicating to the courts the severity with which 

 offences under the Act should be viewed. 



12. The court liaison service should be maintained and if 

 necessary expanded to easure that all aseful informa- 

 tion about developments in fisheries law is dissemi- 

 nated throughout the province to enforcement officers 

 and prosecutors, including statistical infonnation for 

 use in sentencing. 



Private Prosecutions 



Some citizens have recently instigated successful inves- 

 tigations and prosecutions under the habitat protection 

 sections of the Fisheries Act. On two occasions, govern- 



