Faint hope clause

Legal Process and Application

The application process under the faint hope clause is a multi-stage judicial procedure designed to be rigorous. An eligible prisoner must first apply to the Chief Justice of the province where they were convicted, or to another designated judge. This judge conducts a preliminary review to determine if the applicant has a reasonable chance of success before a jury. If the judge is satisfied that the application has merit, the court will then empanel a jury to conduct a full hearing. The jury hears extensive evidence, which can include the prisoner's character, their conduct and rehabilitation efforts while incarcerated, the nature of the original offence, and the impact of the crime on the victim's family. The presiding judge has discretion to admit any other information deemed relevant to the application. Following the hearing, the jury must decide unanimously whether to reduce the offender's parole eligibility period. A successful application does not guarantee release but merely permits the prisoner to apply for parole to the Parole Board of Canada, which makes the final determination on whether to grant early release. The requirement for a unanimous jury verdict sets a high standard, ensuring that any reduction in the parole ineligibility period has broad consensus from the community members serving on the jury.

Historical Origins and Rationale

The faint hope clause was introduced in 1976 as part of a major reform that abolished the death penalty in Canada, replacing it with mandatory life imprisonment for first and second degree murder. Legislators created the clause to serve several key policy objectives. A primary goal was to encourage rehabilitation among prisoners serving life sentences by providing a tangible incentive for good behaviour and personal reform. The clause was also intended to bring Canada's sentencing practices in line with those of other Western nations, where convicted murderers were often eligible for parole after an average of 15 years. Policymakers argued that offering a potential avenue for early parole reduced the risk of violence within prisons. The rationale held that inmates with absolutely no hope of release might have nothing to lose, potentially making them more dangerous to corrections staff and other prisoners. By providing a faint hope, the system aimed to maintain order and safety within penitentiaries while acknowledging the possibility of an offender's reform over a long period of incarceration.

Usage Statistics and Outcomes

Judicial reviews under the faint hope clause began in 1987, more than a decade after the law was enacted. As of October 2010, official statistics provided a snapshot of its application. At that time, 1,508 offenders were eligible to apply for a judicial review under the clause. Of that eligible population, courts had rendered decisions in 181 cases. The outcomes demonstrated that success was not automatic but was achieved in a significant proportion of heard cases. Specifically, 146 of those 181 court decisions resulted in the offender becoming eligible to apply for earlier parole. From that group, 135 offenders were subsequently granted parole by the Parole Board of Canada. These figures indicate that while the application process was stringent, a substantial number of inmates who pursued it ultimately secured a reduction in their parole ineligibility period and were released. The data shows that a majority of those who received a reduced eligibility period from a jury were ultimately deemed suitable for release by the parole authorities.

Political Controversy and Path to Repeal

The faint hope clause became a focal point of political debate, particularly after the election of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservative government in 2006. The government had campaigned on a tough-on-crime platform and pledged to repeal the clause. In August 2006, Justice Minister Vic Toews reaffirmed this commitment, promising to introduce repeal legislation. The first major legislative attempt was Bill C-36, introduced in June 2009. The bill passed the House of Commons in November 2009, with Justice Minister Rob Nicholson stating it was about saying no to early parole for murderers. However, the bill died in the Senate when Parliament was prorogued by Governor General Michaëlle Jean on December 30, 2009, on the advice of Prime Minister Harper. The government persisted, reintroducing the legislation in the Senate as Bill S-6 in the spring of 2010. After parliamentary passage, Bill S-6 received Royal Assent in March 2011 and came into force on December 2, 2011. This change meant the faint hope clause was no longer available for any offences committed after that date, effectively abolishing it for future crimes. The political journey from pledge to law took over five years and involved multiple parliamentary manoeuvres.

Key Restrictions and Ineligibility

Even before its full repeal, the faint hope clause was subject to important legislative restrictions that limited its application. One significant restriction, enacted earlier, applied to individuals convicted of multiple murders. Any person convicted of multiple murders that occurred after January 9, 1997, was rendered ineligible to apply for a reduction in their parole eligibility period. This amendment was largely a political response to public outrage after convicted serial killer and rapist Clifford Olson applied for release under the clause. His application, though unsuccessful, galvanized support for tightening the law. The final and most sweeping restriction was the 2011 abolition, which made the clause unavailable for all offences committed after December 2, 2011. This created a two-tier system where eligibility is permanently determined by the date of the offence, not the date of conviction or any other factor. These restrictions reflect a gradual shift in legislative focus from rehabilitation towards fixed and longer periods of punishment for the most serious crimes.

Notable Legislative Timeline

The evolution of the faint hope clause can be traced through key legislative and political events over several decades. The timeline began with its introduction in 1976 as part of the death penalty abolition package, followed by the first judicial reviews in 1987. A major restriction came in 1997, revoking eligibility for those convicted of multiple murders committed after January 9 of that year. The political push for full repeal started with the election of the Harper government in 2006, leading to the introduction of Bill C-36 in June 2009 and its passage in the House of Commons that November. That bill died in the Senate after prorogation in December 2009, but the government reintroduced it as Senate Bill S-6 in spring 2010. Bill S-6 received Royal Assent in March 2011 and the repeal took effect on December 2, 2011.

• 1976: Clause introduced alongside abolition of the death penalty.
• 1987: First judicial reviews conducted under the clause.
• 1997: Eligibility revoked for those convicted of multiple murders committed after January 9.
• 2006: Harper government elected with a pledge to repeal the clause.
• June 2009: Government introduces Bill C-36 to abolish the clause.
• November 2009: Bill C-36 passes the House of Commons but later dies in the Senate.
• Spring 2010: Government reintroduces legislation as Senate Bill S-6.
• March 2011: Bill S-6 receives Royal Assent.
• December 2, 2011: Repeal comes into force. Clause unavailable for new offences.

The faint hope clause remained stable for many years after its introduction in 1976. The Government of Canada under Prime Minister Stephen Harper, elected in 2006, pledged to repeal the clause. An initial bill, Bill C-36, passed the House of Commons in 2009 but died in the Senate when parliament was prorogued. A second bill, Bill S-6, was reintroduced in the Senate in 2010. This bill was passed by Parliament and given Royal Assent in March 2011, coming into force in December of that year.

The Role of Key Political Figures

The movement to repeal the faint hope clause was championed by specific political leaders within the Conservative government. Justice Minister Vic Toews, appointed in 2006, was the first to publicly recommit to the pledge and announce the intent to table legislation. When Bill C-36 was before Parliament, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson became the public face of the effort, delivering the government's firm stance against early parole for murderers. The legislative process also involved the Governor General, as the prorogation of Parliament in December 2009 by Governor General Michaëlle Jean on the Prime Minister's advice directly caused the death of the first repeal bill, Bill C-36. These individuals played decisive roles in the policy's development, promotion, and ultimate enactment into law.

Current Status and Legacy

The faint hope clause remains a part of Canadian law for a diminishing group of offenders. Individuals who committed crimes eligible for the clause before December 2, 2011, may still apply, provided they meet all other criteria such as having served 15 years. The clause's legacy is complex, embodying a rehabilitative ideal within a retributive justice system. It sparked enduring debates about the balance between punishment and mercy, the potential for redemption, and the rights of victims' families. While no longer a feature for new sentences, its history continues to inform discussions about sentencing reform and correctional policy in Canada. The clause is a historical marker of a period where Canadian law explicitly sought to balance life imprisonment with an incentive for inmate rehabilitation and institutional safety.

Questions about Faint hope clause

What is the faint hope clause in Canada?

The faint hope clause is the common name for section 745.6 of the Criminal Code. It was a provision that allowed prisoners serving life sentences with parole ineligibility periods longer than 15 years to apply to a court to have that period reduced after serving 15 years. A successful application permitted them to then apply for parole to the Parole Board of Canada. It was introduced in 1976 and was abolished for offences committed after December 2, 2011.

Who was eligible to apply under the faint hope clause?

Eligibility depended on the date of the offence. Prisoners serving life sentences for crimes committed before December 2, 2011, could potentially apply, provided they had served at least 15 years. However, individuals convicted of multiple murders committed after January 9, 1997, were specifically excluded from eligibility. For any murder committed after December 2, 2011, the clause is no longer available at all.

How did the faint hope clause application process work?

The process began with an application to the Chief Justice of the relevant province. A judge would first screen the application to see if there was a reasonable chance of success. If so, a jury was empanelled for a hearing. The jury heard evidence on the inmate's character, prison conduct, the nature of the crime, and its impact on victims. The jury then had to decide unanimously whether to reduce the parole eligibility period. A reduction only allowed the inmate to apply for parole. The Parole Board made the final release decision.

Why was the faint hope clause abolished?

The Government of Canada under Prime Minister Stephen Harper pledged during the 2006 election campaign to repeal the clause for all offenders. The Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson, stated that ending faint hope reviews meant saying no to early parole for murderers. After several legislative attempts, Bill S-6 was passed by Parliament and given Royal Assent in March 2011. The faint hope clause is no longer available for any offences committed after December 2, 2011.

Can anyone use the faint hope clause today?

Yes, but only a specific and shrinking group. Any offender who committed a eligible crime before December 2, 2011, and who meets the other criteria, such as having served 15 years, can still apply. However, no one convicted of an offence committed after that date can use the clause. Their parole ineligibility periods are now fixed by the sentencing judge with no possibility of judicial review at 15 years.

What was the success rate for faint hope clause applications?

As of October 10, 2010, 1,508 offenders were eligible to apply for a judicial review. Courts had made 181 decisions on these applications. Out of these 181 court decisions, 146 resulted in the offender becoming eligible for earlier parole. Subsequently, 135 of these offenders were granted parole by the Parole Board of Canada. This data shows that a significant majority of applications that proceeded to a hearing were successful in reducing the parole eligibility period. The ultimate decision to grant parole always remained with the Parole Board.

Sources and further reading

• Faint hope clause (Wikipedia)
• Life Sentences subject to The “Faint Hope Clause” (ccja-acjp.ca)
• The Constitutionality of Repealing the "Faint Hope" Clause (albertalawreview.com)
• Senator Kim Pate Topic Intervention 582283 - 34 (sencanada.ca)

Checked by the Novello Desserts desk. Last updated 2026-10-31.