Bill C-23, Eliminating Pardons for Serious Crimes Act, would amend the Criminal Records Act and other Acts. The current system of Pardons would be replaced, and the word Pardons would be replaced by a more restrictive and narrowly defined Record Suspension.

To be granted a Record Suspension:

• the applicant must not have been convicted of an offence involving sexual activity relating to a minor – as set out in a schedule of specified offences – unless the applicant can demonstrate s/he was “close in age” and that the offence did not involve a position of trust/authority, bodily harm or threat of violence/intimidation;
  
• the applicant must not have been convicted of more than three (3) offences prosecuted by indictment.

The Parole Board of Canada (PBC) may order a Record Suspension if it is satisfied that:

For summary conviction offences:

• during the applicable waiting period, the applicant was of good conduct and was not convicted of an offence under an Act of Parliament;

For indictable offences:

• ordering the Record Suspension would provide a measurable benefit to the applicant; would sustain his or her rehabilitation in society as a law-abiding citizen and would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
  The onus is on the applicant to satisfy the PBC that a Record Suspension would provide a measurable benefit to themselves and sustain their rehabilitation as a law-abiding citizen.

In determining whether the ordering of a Record Suspension would bring the administration of justice into disrepute, the PBC may consider:

• the nature, gravity, and duration of the offence;
  
• the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offence;
  
• information relating to the applicant’s criminal history.

The PBC shall, within three (3) months of the end of each fiscal year, submit to the Minister a report containing the following information:

• the number of applications for Record Suspensions made for both summary conviction and indictable offences;
  
• the number of Record Suspensions ordered and the number of Record Suspensions refused in respect of both summary conviction and indictable offences;
  
• the number of Record Suspensions ordered, indexed by the offence to which they relate and the province of residence of the applicant; and
  
• any other information the Minister may require.

The PBC may disclose decisions that order or refuse to order Record Suspensions, though it may not disclose information that could reasonably be expected to identify an individual (unless authorized in writing by that individual).

These measures will come into force on Royal Assent as follows:

• applications received on or after the day of coming into force will be disposed of under the new measures;
  
• applications received prior to coming into force and not disposed of will be governed by the previous rules.
  

What is the difference between Bill C-23 and C-23A

The original Bill C-23 contained many clauses that would significantly change the rules for obtaining a Pardon including changing the term Pardon to Record Suspension.

Usually Bills are debated by the political parties and compromises are made. In this case, the government wanted to hurry the Bill C-23 through the legislature very quickly in order to stop Karla Homolka (and anyone else with such heinous crimes) to receive a Pardon. As a result of wanting to do it in a hurry, the Bill was stripped of many of its original clauses in order to ensure quick passage.

Bill C-23A gives the government the ability to reject Pardon applications “that would bring the administration of justice into disrepute”. In other words, it would give them discretion to reject someone like Karla Homolka for a Canada Pardon.

In addition the new Bill C-23A stipulates that individuals who were convicted of certain serious personal injury offences under the Criminal Code (including manslaughter) and who were sentenced to prison for at least 2 years would have to wait 10 years after completing their sentence before applying for a Pardon.