Can a defendant be re-elected to a jury by standing for re-election before the trial of the accused?

In The Queen v. Natayache it was held that this subsection means that the re-election must occur before the first sitting at which the accused is scheduled to be tried. In that case the accused deliberately absented himself from several jury sittings at which his trial was to have taken place, and he was finally apprehended after which he attempted to re-elect. As pointed out in the judgment, to permit reelection in those circumstances would be tantamount to encouraging such activities by an accused. I agree with the interpretation placed on the subsection in the circumstances which existed in that case.