R V Ruzic Summary

Case Name : R.V. Ruzic
Facts: Marijana Ruzic age 21 , from Belgrade was charged with three offences, two of which proceeded to trial; unlawful importation of a narcotic contrary 5(1) of the Narcotic Control Act, and possession and use of a false passport contrary to s.368 of the Criminal Code . Ms.Ruzic Admitted to committing both offences but claimed that she did it because her mother’s life was put under danger. A man named Mirko Mirkovic two months prior to her coming to Canada threatened to harm her and her mother unless she helped him illegally smuggle heroin into Canada. On April 25, 1994 Mirkovic prepared Ms.Ruzic with three packages of heroin gave her a false passport and instructed her to go to Toronto; Ms.Ruzic was allegedly warned that if she did not comply her mother would be harm. Ms.Ruzic Arrived in Budapest on April 26 and left for Toronto two days later, on April 29. Ms.Ruzic Never seeked any type of police protection in fear that Belgrade police were corrupt and would do nothing to assist her. Ms.Ruzic successfully challenged the constitutionality

of s.17 under s.7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Issue: The issues in this case dealt with Constitutional law- Charter Of Rights – Fundamental Justice – Criminal Code providing a defense of compulsion by threats – Provision requiring that treat be of immediate death or bodily harm from a person who is present when offence is committed – Whether immediacy and presence requirements of provision infringe principles of fundamental justice (Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ss.1, 7 – Criminal Code). Ms.Ruzic case also dealt with Criminal law; -Defenses-Duress-Criminal Code providing a defense of compulsion by threats – provision requiring that threat must be of immediate death or bodily harm from a person who is present when offence is committed – Whether trial judge right in allowing common law defense of duress to go to jury –Whether trial judge adequately instructed jury on defense – Criminal Code S. 17. The courts had to decide if Ms.Ruzic was legal liable for her actions because section 17 of the code breaches s.7 of the Charter because it allows individuals who acted involuntarily to be declared criminally liable. The section limits the defense of duress to a person who is compelled to commit an offence under threats of immediate death or bodily harm from a person who is present when the offence is committed. It had to be shown by proper evidence that the accused acted under duress. S.7 of the charter requires that the defense of duress be used by an accused even if they weren’t under immediate threat of bodily harm at the time the offence was committed.

Decision: At trial Ms.Ruzic argued that because the offence was committed under duress she should not be criminal responsibility.

Her claim of duress did not meet the presence and immediacy requirements of s. 17 of the Criminal Code. When Ms.Ruzic committed the offence, Mirkovic the man who was threatening her was not present and she was not under any type of immediate threat, death or bodily harm. Ms.Ruzic successfully argued that s. 17 of the Code was unconstitutional because it violated her right to security of the person under s. 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Ms.Ruzic was acquitted on the charge of importing heroin. The Crown appealed the acquittal on the charge of importing heroin, but the court of appeal dismissed the appeal. The Supreme Court agreed that s.17 breached s.7 of the Charter because then other people would be defenseless if the threat was not directly

immediate.

Opinion: I believe that the Decision for Ms.Ruzic case was appropriate for her case. Ms.Ruzic threats weren’t immediate and the man whom threatened her wasn’t present but she still would be in danger if she didn’t do what he had asked her to do. If the court charged her they would be breaching her Rights under s.7 of the Charter therefore making other people in similar cases like this defenseless. By the court acquitting her charges they allowed other people in cases similar like this a chance to come out and without fear of getting themselves in trouble while doing it. Ms.Ruzic if charged criminal should serve the minimum time for both of her cases.