Home / Supreme Court of Canada to hear case about disclosure of Canadians’ private communications to foreign authorities

Supreme Court of Canada to hear case about disclosure of Canadians’ private communications to foreign authorities

Ottawa – On April 22, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada will hear arguments in Wakeling et al. v. Canada on behalf of the U.S.A et al. The BCCLA is an intervener in the case.

The case considers whether transmitting private communications collected with judicial authorization in Canada to foreign authorities violates sssections. 7 and 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The case involves a request by the United States of America to extradite the appellant Mr. Wakeling, a resident of Canada. The U.S. extradition request is based on wiretap evidence that was collected as part of a covert Canadian criminal investigation and then disclosed to the U.S. by authorities in Canada pursuant to s. 193(2)(e) of the Criminal Code.

The BCCLA will argue that section 193(2)(e) of the Criminal Code violates s. 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The section permits near-limitless disclosure of Canadian private communications to investigators or prosecutors in a foreign statecountry. Police can disclose intercepted private communications to an official in a foreign state even if the disclosure is only in the interests of the administration of justice in that foreign jurisdiction – not in Canada’s interests. There is no oversight of the disclosure: no judicial authorization is required, consent is not sought, notice need not be provided and there is no reporting or monitoring mechanism.

The BCCLA is represented by Michael Feder and Emily MacKinnon of McCarthy Tétrault.

The BCCLA’s argument in this case is available here >>

What: SCC to hear oral arguments in Wakeling et al. v. Canada on behalf of the U.S.A et al
When: Oral arguments to begin on Tuesday, April 22, 2014 at 9:30 am EST / 6:30 am PST
Where: Supreme Court of Canada (Ottawa, ON)
Who: Lawyer for the BCCLA available for comment

 

CIVIL LIBERTIES CAN’T PROTECT THEMSELVES