SCRA Committee Report

8.2 In October 1998, the standing committee tabled its fourteenth report entitled Victims' Rights - A Voice, Not A Veto containing 17 recommendations. The standing committee proposed the adoption of a victims strategy, the establishment of an office for victims of crime, and recommended a number of changes to the Criminal Code and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act to be included in an omnibus bill containing a preamble setting out Parliament's legislative policy intention. The government's response to the standing committee's report in December 1998 was followed by the adoption by Parliament in June 1999 of Bill C-79, which contained a number of amendments to the Criminal Code. Neither the government response nor the subsequent legislation dealt with the Act, and further initiatives were left in abeyance, pending the report of the Sub-committee. The standing committee's report provides the point of departure for the Sub-committee's consideration of victims' issues. The Sub-committee reconsidered each of its recommendations for changes to the Act; however, this chapter also deals with other issues not addressed by the standing committee.

8.3 The Act deals with victims' concerns in several ways. First of all, Part I and Part II of the Act both contain definitions of who victims are. Secondly, the Act contains provisions with respect to offender information that can be received by victims from the Correctional Service and the Parole Board, and offender information they can provide to these agencies. Thirdly, the Act deals with the presence of observers, including victims, at Parole Board hearings.

8.4 As the standing committee said in its 1998 report, generally the needs of victims are not complicated. They want information about the corrections and conditional release system and the progress of the case in which they are involuntarily involved. They wish their voices to be heard at different stages of the corrections and conditional release process. They want redress where these rights are not respected. These issues are addressed in this chapter.

8.5 The Sub-committee believes the rights and needs of victims can be effectively addressed within the corrections and conditional release system without compromising or weakening its fairness or effectiveness. The Canadian Criminal Justice Association offers the following advice to the Sub-committee, which it follows in this chapter:

Reasonable steps should be taken to accommodate the reasonable and legitimate demands of victims. What is most important is ensuring that the role of the victim does not launch another adversarial process, that the rights and interests of all parties are respected and that there is no opportunity for vengeance to become an influencing factor. Adjustments to current practice would be required, but, as usual, the system will manage to adjust.¹⁰³

8.6 Section 26 and section 142 of the Act deal with the provision, by the Correctional Service and Parole Board respectively, of offender information to victims, as defined by the Act. Both provisions deal with information that must be provided to victims or their families, on request. They also deal with information that may be provided to victims, on request, if the interest of the victim clearly outweighs the invasion of the offender's privacy resulting from the disclosure.

8.7 The following offender information must be provided to victims or their families on request:

• the offender's name;
• the offence for which the offender has been convicted;
• the court where the offender was convicted;
• the date the offender began to serve his sentence;
• the length of the sentence; and
• temporary absence, day parole, and full parole eligibility and review dates.

8.8 The following offender information may be provided to the victim or their family on request:

• the offender's age;
• the penitentiary where the sentence is being served;
• the date of release on temporary absence, work release, day parole, full parole, or statutory release;
• the date of a detention hearing;
• the conditions of temporary absence, work release, day parole, full parole, or statutory release;
• the destination of an offender on temporary absence, work release, day parole, full parole, or statutory release, and whether the offender will be in the vicinity of the victim while travelling to the destination;
• whether the offender is in custody, and if not, why not; and
• whether the offender has appealed a Parole Board decision (National Parole Board only).

8.9 There is a clear distinction between the two classes of offender information to be provided to victims or their families on request. The first category that must be provided to a victim consists of information that is largely already in the public domain and is available within other parts of the criminal justice system, especially in the form of criminal court records. Such information as the date a sentence commences, or the eligibility or review dates for various types of conditional release can be calculated based on publicly available information, and is a minimum impairment, if any, of an offender's privacy.

8.10 The second category that may be provided to a victim or their family on request is largely not in the public domain, and because it provides details of the management of an offender's sentence, is an infringement of privacy rights protected by the Privacy Act.¹⁰⁴ For these reasons, this type of information can only be provided to a victim after the responsible authority has applied the statutory test of balancing the interests of the victim against the privacy of the offender.

8.11 As indicated earlier in this chapter, one of the requests made by victims and those acting on their behalf is for more information about the case of the offender with whom they are involuntarily involved. This information on the management of the offender's sentence does two things. It allows victims to track the sentence and have a minimum sense of security with regard to where the offender is serving his sentence. It also allows the victim to determine whether they will be providing information to corrections and conditional release authorities about the impact on them of the offender's criminal act.

8.12 In urging that victims be provided with more offender information, Victims of Violence made the following argument:

The offender's right to privacy prevents the victim from being kept informed as to whether the offender, for instance, is partaking in anger management courses or if he has been involved in violent acts within the prison. Many victims are related to the offender in their case and, upon release, the offender may come into contact with the victim and the victim's family. Should the family not have the right to know? There seems to be great secrecy surrounding the offender's conduct in prison even though this information could possibly benefit the victim.¹⁰⁵

8.13 Victims are concerned about the level of risk an offender represents to themselves and to the community resulting from any form of conditional release. They believe they can measure that risk and make any adjustments they feel necessary if they have access to more information about the management of the offender's sentence than is already available to them. To address this issue, the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime has submitted to the Sub-committee that:

There is certain information that victims would like to have access to which is currently prohibited by law, such as: information on programs the offender has taken to address his problems and the success of these programs. If the victim gets a sense that the offender is taking genuine steps to improve himself, then there might not be such fear or concern when he is released.¹⁰⁶

8.14 In the same vein, the Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario Office for Victims of Crime made the following recommendation:

...Section 26 of the CCRA should be reviewed to assess what additional information should be supplied to victims but while some personal offender information should be protected, institutional conduct or activity relevant to risk should be released.¹⁰⁷

8.15 After reviewing these arguments and others, the Sub-committee has concluded that the Act should be amended to allow for the provision of more offender information to victims requesting it. This information should relate to the management of the offender's sentence by corrections and conditional release authorities. More particularly, this additional information should allow the victim to have a sense of what the offender has done to address criminogenic factors while incarcerated. It should also allow the victim to have a sense of the offender's likelihood of reoffending and to take any necessary steps to cope with it.

8.16 The Sub-committee believes victims should have access to information about the offender's participation in programs, the offender's conduct while incarcerated, and the offender's reincarceration for having committed a new offence while on any form of conditional release.

8.17 However, because this type of information is invasive of the offender's privacy rights, the Sub-committee believes it should only be made available to the requesting victim after a privacy balancing test has been applied by the responsible authority. As well, because some of this information may be detailed and complex, it should be made available to victims or their families in a form adequate to assist them, while being minimally invasive of the offender's privacy rights.

RECOMMENDATION 36

The Sub-committee recommends that paragraphs 26(1)(b) and 142(1)(b) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to allow for the provision to victims, as defined in the Act, of offender information related to offender program participation, offender institutional conduct, and new offences committed by a conditionally released offender resulting in reincarceration.

8.18 Subparagraph 26(1)(b)(ii) of the Act allows the Correctional Service to provide a victim with information as to the penitentiary in which a sentence is being served. This provision was dealt with indirectly in part by recommendation 16 of the standing committee's 1998 report on victims' rights. It was recommended, among other things, that the Act be amended to require the Correctional Service to notify victims of anticipated offender transfers.

8.19 The issue of offender transfer from one penitentiary to another, among other matters, was addressed by Rosalie Turcotte for CAVEAT BC in her discussion paper entitled Openness and Accountability Within the Correctional Service of Canada: A Time for Change. In urging that section 26 be amended, she makes the following argument:

Legislation should be created which would require CSC to advise and seek out the victims' views, prior to the decision being made, whenever a transfer is being contemplated by CSC in the routine administration of an offender's sentence.¹⁰⁸

8.20 She goes on to recommend that subparagraph 26(1)(b)(ii) be amended to add the words `planned to be served,' so as to require the Correctional Service to advise a victim or family members of a transfer before it is effected. In her view, this would bring this development to the victim's attention and allow for the provision by them of information not in the offender's file that may be relevant to the institutional transfer decision.

8.21 Because the Act does not at the present time clearly allow for the provision of institutional transfer information to victims or family members before the actual transfer takes place, the Sub-committee agrees with this recommendation. Although the time within which transfers are effected is in most instances too compressed to allow for the provision of new information, this recommended amendment would at least provide the victim with notice of a planned, anticipated, or scheduled inmate transfer.

RECOMMENDATION 37

The Sub-committee recommends that subparagraph 26(1)(b)(ii) of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to allow for the Correctional Service of Canada to advise victims (as defined in the Act) in a timely manner, and wherever possible in advance, of the planned, anticipated, or scheduled routine transfer of inmates.

8.22 Recommendation 14 of the standing committee's 1998 victims' report proposed that the Act be amended to facilitate victim access to audiotapes or transcripts of Parole Board hearings by making them available for consultation purposes. The purpose of this recommendation was to make offender information available to victims unable to attend a particular parole or detention hearing. As well, it would have the effect of opening up the corrections and conditional release system still more to Canadians.

8.23 The Parole Board does not at the present time produce transcripts of its hearings, although they are recorded on audiotape. To require the Parole Board to transcribe these audiotapes would represent a significant expenditure and delay victim access to the information revealed during a hearing. The Sub-committee therefore adopts standing committee recommendation 14 as its own, making it only applicable to audiotapes.

RECOMMENDATION 38

The Sub-committee recommends that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to facilitate victim access, for consultation purposes at Correctional Service or Parole Board offices, to audiotape recordings of Parole Board hearings.

8.24 Section 140 of the Act allows for the presence of observers at Parole Board hearings. They have the right to attend, but not to participate in, these proceedings. Victims, as defined in the Act, are allowed to attend hearings as observers. The file of any offender appearing before the Parole Board will usually contain the victim impact statement and other sentencing court documents, as well as any other information provided by the victim concerning the impact of the offence on them.

8.25 Many victims and victims groups believe this is not adequate. They argue that victims should be able to participate directly and fully in Parole Board hearings. The standing committee dealt with this issue in recommendation 15 of its October 1998 victims' report. At that time, it recommended that the Act be amended to provide victims with a presumptive right to be present at Parole Board hearings and to read an updated victim impact statement, or to provide one by way of audiotape or videotape.

8.26 Similar recommendations were made to the Sub-committee by the Canadian Police Association,¹⁰⁹ the Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario Office for Victims of Crime,¹¹⁰ and the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime.¹¹¹ The Sub-committee agrees with these recommendations and with the position taken by the standing committee. It also wants to add several elements to the standing committee's recommendation.

8.27 The Canadian Criminal Justice Association, in reporting the views of a victim organization, offers the following cautionary note:

... hearings should not become a duplication of the trial and the participation of the victim should not become an adversarial process. That is not to be the objective, nor would it be a proper way of administering justice. Victims should be invited to comment on specific points:

1. Describe the impact of the offence on them.

2. Express their fear and apprehensions relative to a potential release.

3. Request that specific conditions be imposed to enhance their safety.¹¹²

8.28 The Sub-committee agrees with and adopts the sentiment of this caution as its own. Any statement presented to a Parole Board hearing in whatever form it takes should contain information dealing with issues arising since the offender was convicted. Among other matters, such a statement could deal with the continuing impact of the offence on the victim, any personal safety concerns the victim may have with regard to the offender, and any conditions the victim may believe should be applied to any form of conditional release. The victim should not comment on the sentence imposed by the court or on whether conditional release should be granted to the offender.

8.29 The Parole Board, in its July 1999 response to the Sub-committee's written questions, indicated that it was developing a comprehensive action plan in response to the standing committee's recommendation 15. In addition to establishing victim application processes, criteria for victim participation, and offender information-sharing requirements, the Parole Board's action plan has also begun to elaborate a process for conducting the hearing itself. Under the proposed process, the victim will read his statement at the beginning of the hearing, before the offender interview itself takes place. If a victim statement is to be presented on audiotape or videotape, it will take place at that same point. After this has occurred, the offender interview by Parole Board members will then take place, and the victim will be able to remain as an observer.

8.30 The Parole Board is to be commended for beginning to develop an action plan for implementation of the standing committee's recommendation. The Parole Board does, however, express some concern about the potential number of victims who will want to participate actively in its hearings. There are two definitions in the Act of victims who may receive offender information. The first is contained in section 2 and section 99 of the Act that define a victim as the person suffering the consequences of the offence or, in case of death, a spouse or relative of that person. The second definition is contained in subsection 26(3) and subsection 142(3) of the Act. They define a victim as a person suffering physical or emotional harm at the hands of the offender, whether or not there has been a prosecution or conviction, so long as a criminal complaint was made or an information was laid under the Criminal Code.

8.31 The Sub-committee shares the Parole Board's concern. It believes victim participation in the Parole Board process should be enriched. But it should be done in such a way that it does not unduly disrupt the inquisitorial process already in place. A victim, as defined in section 2 and section 99 of the Act, should be presumptively permitted to read their statement in person, or have it presented in audiotape or videotape form, at the beginning of a Parole Board hearing. This victim has suffered the consequences of the offence for which the offender has been convicted, and has a direct interest in his conditional release. This does not prevent other victims, more particularly those defined in subsection 26(3) and subsection 142(3) of the Act, from submitting victim impact information in other forms and at other times to corrections and conditional release authorities. They will also still be able to attend Parole Board hearings as observers.

8.32 Victim presentations to Parole Board hearings are meant to communicate directly their concerns about an offender's release and the impact of the offence since conviction. This is done most effectively by victims themselves communicating this information directly to Parole Board members. To allow intermediaries or representatives to communicate this information on behalf of victims may cause hearings to become more complex and to bog down, leading to delays in decision making.

RECOMMENDATION 39

The Sub-committee recommends that the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended to allow victims, as defined in section 2 and section 99, to presumptively attend and personally read statements, at the beginning of Parole Board hearings, that set out the impact of the offence on them since the offender's conviction, or any concerns they have about the conditions of any release. Such victims should also be able to present their statements on audiotape or videotape.

8.33 Victims and organizations representing them have identified unwanted communications from offenders as a source of fear and distress. It takes the form of telephone calls, mail and communication through third parties. Although it may not occur that frequently, when it does it has a disturbing effect on victims and those close to them.

8.34 The standing committee dealt with this issue at recommendation 17 of its report, and described initiatives taken by corrections and conditional release authorities. More particularly, section 95 of the Corrections and Conditional Release Regulations permits a penitentiary warden to prohibit an inmate from communicating by mail or telephone with any person, if the safety of any person would be jeopardized, or the recipient or intended recipient requests in writing that they not receive any inmate communications.

8.35 At that time, the standing committee urged the Solicitor General to take further steps to prevent unwanted communications from inmates in federal correctional institutions. Both the Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario Office for Victims of Crime and the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime have made proposals on this issue to the Sub-committee. The Office for Victims of Crime recommended that the Solicitor General direct both the Correctional Service and the Parole Board to take administrative measures, including insertion of notice of offender non-contact remedies, into all victim publications and communications.¹¹³ The Resource Centre for Victims of Crime recommended that section 95 of the Regulations be amended to remove any discretion wardens may have in prohibiting unwanted inmate contact with victims. They also urged better monitoring of inmate telephone calls.¹¹⁴

8.36 The Sub-committee welcomes these recommendations as presenting concrete, practical options for consideration. However, the Sub-committee believes a more comprehensive approach to this issue is required. The frequency of unwanted inmate communication and the means by which it happens must be determined before effective counter measures can be developed. Therefore a strengthened version of the standing committee's recommendation is preferred as providing a more comprehensive approach to this issue.

RECOMMENDATION 40

The Sub-committee recommends that the Solicitor General of Canada, in conjunction with the Correctional Service of Canada and the National Parole Board, develop a comprehensive strategy to prevent any unwanted communications from offenders in federal correctional institutions, especially with victims.

8.37 Since Parliament adopted the Corrections and Conditional Release Act in 1992, both the Correctional Service and the Parole Board have undertaken a number of initiatives to provide victims with case-specific and general information. They have also engaged in a number of outreach and public education activities including, among others, the publication of pamphlets, fact sheets, and newspaper inserts.

8.38 The National Parole Board operates toll-free telephone lines in most of its regions. It also operates a decision registry that makes its conditional release decisions available to victims and other interested persons, and facilitates the attendance of observers, including victims, at its hearings. Moreover, the Parole Board has appointed a community liaison officer at each of its regional offices, to assist in providing victims with services and information to which they are entitled under the Act. The Correctional Service has appointed victim liaison coordinators at each of its regional offices, community parole offices, and correctional institutions. In both cases, these functions are performed by Correctional Service and Parole Board employees in addition to other daily responsibilities. The Correctional Service and the Parole Board jointly provide victims with one-stop services in the Ontario and Pacific regions out of Board offices, where all offender files are located.

8.39 Community liaison officers and victim liaison coordinators perform the following core duties, among others:

• receive requests for information from victims;
• obtain information from police and other sources to ascertain victim status;
• inform victims in writing of their status and provide information;
• contact victims when significant developments occur;
• maintain information regarding victim contacts;
• ensure relevant information provided by victims is forwarded to decision-makers;
• refer victims in need of counselling and other services to appropriate sources; and
• provide victims with other sources of information such as the Parole Board Decision Registry and access to Parole Board hearings as observers.¹¹⁵

8.40 A number of victims and organizations representing their interests have told the Sub-committee that even though the Correctional Service and Parole Board have put these services into place, they do not always get satisfaction. They say they cannot always contact the right person within these agencies who can provide them with accurate, up-to-date, case-specific or general victim information. They also complain about getting different, and at times conflicting, offender information they have requested and to which they are entitled. They also feel they are not always treated respectfully by the persons with whom they have to deal. At times, victims' or their families' interests are not fully taken into account, nor are they adequately consulted by Correctional Service or Parole Board boards of investigation reviewing the circumstances of corrections and conditional release system breakdowns, with tragic consequences.¹¹⁶

8.41 Finally, victims believe they do not have an independent, disinterested office or authority to which they can have recourse to effectively deal with their complaints. This point was made by the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime when it said:

Victims have no Correctional Investigator or any equivalent if they feel that their rights have been ignored or violated. There is no official office where victims can go if they have concerns/complaints about issues where they feel they have been mistreated or are not getting access to the information they deserve.¹¹⁷

8.42 A number of organizations making submissions to the Sub-committee agreed with this submission and made proposals for dealing with the issues it addresses. For example, the Canadian Police Association recommended that the Office of the Correctional Investigator be expanded or a parallel entity be established.¹¹⁸ The Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario Office for Victims of Crime proposed that the Office of the Correctional Investigator be expanded to also receive victims' and correctional staff's complaints about the National Parole Board and provincial parole boards.¹¹⁹ Victims of Violence,¹²⁰ Mothers Against Drunk Driving,¹²¹ and the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime¹²² proposed that the Act be amended to provide for the establishment of a victims' ombudsman office, equivalent to that of the Correctional Investigator.

8.43 The Sub-committee seriously considered each of these alternative proposals, and others, before making its findings and developing its recommendations. The Correctional Service and the Parole Board have taken substantial steps since 1992 to meet the needs and requirements of victims, their families, and those close to them. But still more has to be done.

8.44 Because the corrections and conditional release system is complex, victims and their families are at times confronted by an informational maze to which they are unable to find the entry point. They first have to determine what their rights or entitlements are. Once this is found out, they have to then determine whether the Correctional Service or the Parole Board is where they have to go. Finally, they have to figure out whether they have to go to a regional office, a community parole office, or a correctional institution to get the offender information to which they are entitled. If victims or their families are dissatisfied at any point in this maze, they have no outside complaint body at their disposal to provide assistance.

8.45 If a victim or family member is not satisfied with the conditional release information received from the Parole Board Decision Registry, there is no established complaints mechanism to which they have access. If a victim or family member is dissatisfied with the treatment received when attending a Parole Board hearing as an observer, there is no independent mechanism in place to which that person has access. The same applies to victims denied observer status who are unhappy with the reason given for their exclusion. Victims and family members unhappy with the information from, or the consultation by, boards of investigation have no complaints mechanism open to them.

8.46 After examining all of these issues, the Sub-committee has concluded that victims have identified two needs. The first of these needs is for a clearly identified entry point for access to information to which they are entitled. This is especially important where there are several possible sources within the Correctional Service and the Parole Board where this information can be obtained. This access point could be available to obtain the required victim information directly or to direct the victim to the source in the corrections and conditional release system where it can be obtained.

8.47 The second need identified by victims and those representing them is for an independent mechanism that can receive, investigate and resolve complaints they have about their contacts with the Correctional Service and the Parole Board. This mechanism would not be restricted to addressing individual complaints, but would also have to be able to conduct system-wide reviews when necessary.

8.48 The Sub-committee is convinced that such an independent information and complaints mechanism is required, but does not believe it needs all the powers and resources accorded to the Correctional Investigator as a specialist ombudsman office. The Sub-committee is convinced, however, that the informational and complaints needs of victims and their families for timely assistance can be met by amending the Act to add part IV to it, establishing the victims' information and complaints office.

8.49 This office should be a supplementary source of victim information, building upon, not replacing, what the Correctional Service and Parole Board have put in place since 1992. It should both provide victims with direct access to information and indicate where in the corrections and conditional release system they can find it. It should independently investigate, resolve and report upon complaints it receives from victims, their families and those close to them. The office should not be restricted to investigating individual complaints, but should also be enabled to address the system-wide context for victim concerns.

8.50 Its jurisdiction, however, should be restricted to information and complaints about the federal corrections and conditional release system, leaving other matters such as provincial and territorial parole and corrections, and police and prosecution responsibilities, to other levels of government.

8.51 The proposed victims information and complaints office, as well as the Correctional Investigator (recommended elsewhere in this report), should, in the Sub-committee's view, be accountable to both the Solicitor General and Parliament. This can be done by having its special and annual reports tabled simultaneously with the minister and in both Houses of Parliament.

8.52 The Sub-committee believes that a thorough consideration of the office's special and annual reports will be encouraged if they contain Correctional Service and Parole Board reaction to its findings, conclusions and recommendations. Elsewhere in this report, the Sub-committee has recommended that section 195 of the Act be amended to require that the Correctional Investigator's special and annual reports contain the Correctional Service's comments, not just a summary of them prepared by the Correctional Investigator. The Sub-committee believes a parallel recommendation should apply to the proposed victims information and complaints office.

8.53 Finally, for accountability to have real meaning, there has to be assurance that special and annual reports receive parliamentary consideration. At the present time, section 192 and section 193 require the tabling in each House of Parliament of the Correctional Investigator's special and annual reports. They are then referred, under the standing orders of the House of Commons, to the appropriate standing committee for consideration. There is, however, no requirement that a standing committee actually review any such report. Standing committees are masters of their own agendas and work plans; the House only rarely directs their work. The Sub-committee has considered this issue elsewhere in this report where, in dealing with the Office of the Correctional Investigator, it has recommended that the Act be amended to require that its reports be referred to the relevant standing committee of the House of Commons for consideration. The Sub-committee believes the same recommendation should also apply to its proposed victims information and complaints office.

RECOMMENDATION 41

The Sub-committee recommends that:

(a) the Corrections and Conditional Release Act be amended by adding part IV to establish the victims' information and complaints office, to have jurisdiction over victim-related activities of both the Correctional Service of Canada and the National Parole Board;

(b) this office be empowered to both provide information to victims as defined in the Act and to receive, investigate, and resolve individual and system-wide victim complaints; and

(c) the office be empowered to table its special and annual reports containing Correctional Service and Parole Board comments on its findings and recommendations, simultaneously with the Solicitor General of Canada and Parliament. The Act should provide for the referral for consideration of such special and annual reports to the appropriate standing committee of the House of Commons.

103^# Brief, p. 19.

104^# R.S.C. 1985, c. P-21, as amended.

105^# Brief, p. 2.

106^# Brief, p. 7.

107^# Brief, p. 5.

108^# Brief, p. 6.

109^# Brief, p. 12.

110^# Brief, p. 5.

111^# Brief, p. 16.

112^# Brief, p. 18.

113^# Brief, p. 8.

114^# Brief, p. 16

115^# Solicitor General, Working Group Studying the Provisions and Operation of the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, Provisions Relating to Victims, February 1998, p. 18-19.

116^# July 19, 1999 letter to the Sub-committee from Steve Sullivan, President, Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime.

117^# Brief, p. 11.

118^# Brief, p. 12.

119^# Brief, p. 7.

120^# Brief, p. 3

121^# Brief, p. 3.

122^# Brief, p. 9-13.