|
T was a Singapore National serving a life sentence who was to be deported
upon his achieving full parole. T had been incarcerated at a minimum-security
institution for a period of three years when he decided to make a request
for an escorted temporary absence. As a result of that request, an interview
took place between T and a correctional officer. The officer asked T about
the possibility of T’s enrollment in a violent offender program (VOP)
and also requested that T submit to a psychological risk assessment. When
T’s Case Management Team reviewed his case, they agreed that T should
be referred to a VOP because he lacked insight into the dynamics of his
offence. T made it known that he did not wish to participate in such a
program because he felt that the resources would be wasted on him considering
he was going to go to Singapore when released. Later, T’s psychological
assessment was completed and its conclusions included that T was a high/moderate
risk for recidivism, that T was not suitably placed in a minimum security
facility, and that T ought to complete a VOP. T was then served with a
Notice of Involuntary Transfer Recommendation. Although T claimed that,
when asked, he stated to prison authorities that he wished to dispute
his transfer and reclassification, two separate staff members asserted
the opposite, claiming that T decided that he would not contest the decisions
made. In his application to the Court for relief in the nature of habeas
corpus with certiorari in aid, T submitted that his incarceration at medium
security was unlawful as the decision to transfer him was made in violation
of ss7 and 10 of the Charter, was contrary to the duty to act fairly and
was, in all the circumstances, patently unreasonable. Downs J. held that
the decision made in this case was reasoned and supported by psychological
assessment. The record contained nothing suggesting a desire on T’s part
to dispute his transfer. The decision was not made in the absence of or
in excess of the jurisdiction of the decision-maker. The petition was
dismissed. |
TOP