Federal
•  (2004-2005), available at http://www.psepc-sppcc.gc.ca/abt/dpr/le/rcmp04_05-en.asp

•  (2003-2204), available at www.psepc-sppcc.gc.ca/abt/dpr/le/rcmp-en.asp
•  (2002-2203), available at ww2.psepc-sppcc.gc.ca/publications/policing/20030611_e.asp

Ontario
•  (2003-2004), available at www.mpss.jus.gov.on.ca/english/publications/policing_services/Bill_C-24_2nd_report.pdf

•  (2002-2203), available at www.mpss.jus.gov.on.ca/english/publications/policing_services/Bill_C-24_1st_report.pdf

Alberta
•  (2004) available at www.solgen.gov.ab.ca/publications/downloads/annual_report/2005/sg/solicitor_general_annual_report_2005_results_analysis.pdf
•  (2002-2003), available at www.solgen.gov.ab.ca/publications/downloads/annual_report/2003/solgen/criminal_code_reporting.htm

British Columbia
•  (2004) available at www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/police_services/publications/justification_provisions/2004report.pdf
•  (2003) available at www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/police_services/publications/justification_provisions/2003report.pdf
•  (2002) available at www.pssg.gov.bc.ca/police_services/publications/justification_provisions/2002report.pdf

Saskatchewan
•  (2005-2006) available at www.saskjustice.gov.sk.ca/25-3CriminalCode2006.shtml

Prince Edward Island
• designation of public authorithies, Royal Gazette, 17 January 2004, EC 2004-1, p. 56, available at www.gov.pe.ca/royalgazette/pdf/20040117.pdf

Nova Scotia
•  Nova Scotia Royal Gazette, Part I,  2005, pp. 291 and 1553  -- check 23 February 2005
•  Nova Scotia Royal Gazette, Part I,  2003, p. 4357

New Brunswick

• (2004-2005), The Royal Gazette, 25 January 2006, p. 96, available at www.gnb.ca/0062/gazette/RG20060125.pdf
• (2003-2004), The Royal Gazette, 7 July 2004, p. 1185, available at www.gnb.ca/0062/gazette/RG20040707.pdf
• (2002-2003), The Royal Gazette, 7 May 2003, p. 474, available at  www.gnb.ca/0062/gazette/RG20030507.pdf

Newfoundland and Labrador
• (2004), Gazette, 11 March 2005, p. 122, available at  www.gs.gov.nl.ca/gs/oqp/pdf/gazette/wk/2005-03-11.pdf

"In conclusion, although it is repeatedly claimed  that infiltration is the most efficient high policing tactic (Shelby 2002: 76-9), and although  there have been clamours for a return to the use of human sources, many problems will have to be solved to make it viable and efficient in a transnational context characterized by sectarianism and ruthlessness.  From what we know about the history of murderous regimes, they are not easy to infiltrate.  The same would apply to murderous organizations.  Nevertheless, governments have far from given up on infiltration and are taking measures to solve some of the problems that we have just discussed.  In new legislation passed against organized crime in the beginning of 2003 (Bill C-24), Canada has granted permission to undercover police and their agents to commit serious crimes in order to infiltrate criminal organizations and preserve their cover.  The law does not list permitted and forbidden crimes in a legal 'schedule,' since that would defeat its purpose. While crimes such as murder, aggravated assault, and other grievous violent acts are not covered by this provision, police may be authorized to commit simple assault (an extendable offence) and deal in drugs in the context of sting and counter-sting operations.  These authorizations confirm the notion that high policing cannot be law abiding in all respects and that it cancels out a significant extent the notion of police deviance." (p. 189)       

"Bill C-24 was introduced in April 2001 and is the product of extensive policy work and consultations, including specific input from the CAPB most notably with respect to protection for police officers from criminal liability. It responds to the Canadian Government's law enforcement priority on organized crime and the strong need to provide the police and prosecutors with additional tools with respect to organized crime. ...

Mr. Scromeda [Legal Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice] next spoke about the protection from criminal liability for law enforcement, an area of Bill C-24 that has received a fair amount of publicity, and the one in which the CAPB has been most involved. There was a specific resolution from the CAPB two years ago asking the Government of Canada to establish a legislative exemption regime in response to the Supreme Court decision on Campbell and Shirose. That April 1999 decision ruled there was no inherent immunity for police for good faith action taken in the course of an investigation. The court implicitly acknowledged the police might have to break the law in the course of such investigations, however immunity from the law must be granted by Parliament.

"The Criminal Code provides for many investigative powers, and all require authorization by an independent judicial officer acting upon information under oath. Examples include:

• section 184.2 interceptions of private communications;
• section 186 interceptions of private communications;
• section 487 warrants to search;
• section 487.01 general warrants;
• section 487.012 production orders;
• section 487.05 warrants to take bodily substances for DNA analysis; and
• section 487.092 warrants for foot, hand, fingerprint or tooth impressions.

Section 25.1 is an exception to Criminal Code provisions and to established constitutional principles. Police officers are not independent judicial officers, and their professional obligations cause them to be constitutionally incapable of conducting the required delicate and objective balance of competing interests. The CBA Section recommends that the exception be repealed in its entirety, but especially in so far as it extends to persons other than public officers.  If section 25.1 is not repealed, then it should be amended to require prior judicial authorization, based on information under oath, that state interests prevail over the interests of the individual, and that the state interest in the investigation must prevail over the competing state interest in
maintaining the rule of law." (p. 3)

In January 2002, the Government of Canada passed Bill C-24, adopting amendments to the 'Criminal Code' that included a  limited criminal liability exemption scheme, providing police officers  with a framework in which to commit illegal acts or omissions in the course of investigations. This thesis analyzes the socio-legal  conditions that surrounded the introduction of this bold policy measure and assesses the relevance and effectiveness of the limited criminal  liability exemption provisions as an instrument of public policy, within the context of organized crime investigations in Canada. The  paper concludes that sufficient rationale exists for the limited criminal liability exemption, however a stronger regulatory and accountability framework is required to improve the transparency of  public reporting and consolidate jurisdictional approaches to undercover policing. (source: AMICUS catalogue entry)

• Performance Report for the Period ending March 31, 2002, available at www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/dpr/01-02/Jus/jus0102dpr-PR_e.asp?printable=True  (accessed 9 July 2006)

"Organized Crime

EXPECTED RESULTS

Enhanced ability to effectively prosecute organized crime cases and groups

ACTIVITIES
·  Establishment of dedicated prosecution teams to fulfill advisory and prosecution functions related to organized crime
·  Implementation of Bill C-24
·  Training on Bill C-24

ACCOMPLISHMENTS
· Organized crime strategy developed with roll out to regional offices planned over a 5- year period
· Proclamation of Bill C-24
· Training provided to RCMP and other law enforcement agencies to enable designation of members for law enforcement justification provisions
· Training on law enforcement justification provisions provided to RCMP, other law enforcement agencies and to federal and provincial prosecutors

MEASURES OF SUCCESS
· Greater integration between investigation and prosecution of cases
·  Better understanding of prosecution needs by investigators
·  Greater prosecutor satisfaction with Crown brief and quality of court preparation
·  Police using law enforcement immunity provisions; prosecutors using organized crime offences and sentencing provisions" (note: text extracted from text in four columns)

• "Government of Canada steps up fight against organized crime, 5 April 2001, www.justice.gc.ca/en/news/nr/2001/doc_26096.html (accessed, 9 July 2006)

• Backgrounder, "Highlights of the Organized Crime Bill", 5 April 2001, www.justice.gc.ca/en/news/nr/2001/doc_26100.html (accessed, 9 July 2006)

• "Organized Crime Legislation Receives Royal Assent", 18 December 2001, www.justice.gc.ca/en/news/nr/2001/doc_28211.html (accessed, 9 July 2006)

• Backgrounder, "Organized Crime Legislation Receives Royal Assent", 18 December 2001, www.justice.gc.ca/en/news/nr/2001/doc_28213.html (accessed, 9 July 2006)

"With respect to surveillance which met the definition of voyeurism but was not authorized by section 487.01, or police investigative activity that involved distribution of voyeuristic visual representations, a further question is whether or not such activity would be authorized pursuant to section 25.1 of the Criminal Code (recently enacted pursuant to Bill C-24 An Act to Amend the Criminal Code, organized crime and law enforcement and to make consequential amendments to other Acts). It is interesting to note that section 25.1, while permitting designated senior officials to authorize otherwise illegal police activity in particular circumstances, is subject to the restriction that police may not engage in conduct that would 'violate the sexual integrity of an individual. 'The scope of 'sexual integrity' in the context of section 25.1 has yet to be determined by the courts, so it is difficult to predict whether or not voyeurism committed by police in the course of law enforcement would be authorized. Police activity would also be measured against the requirement, set out in paragraph 25.1(8)(c), that the police have reasonable grounds to believe "that commission of the act or omission, as compared to the nature of the offence or criminal activity being investigated, is reasonable and proportional in the circumstances, having regard to such matters as the nature of the act or omission, the nature of the investigation and the reasonable availability of other means for carrying out the public officer's law enforcement duties."' ( p. 12)
------
"En ce qui concerne les activités de surveillance entrant dans le cadre de la définition du voyeurisme et qui, en outre, ne seraient pas autorisées par l’article 487.01 ou en ce qui concerne
des enquêtes policières dans le cadre desquelles sont distribuées des représentations visuelles relevant du voyeurisme, il faut se demander si une telle activité serait permise aux termes de
l’article 25.1 du Code criminel (récemment adopté en vertu du projet de loi C-24 : Loi modifiant le Code criminel (crime organisé et application de la loi) et d’autres lois en conséquence). Notons que l’article 25.1 du Code criminel, qui permet à certains fonctionnaires publics désignés d’autoriser, dans certaines circonstances, des activités policières qui seraient autrement illicites,s’applique à condition que la police ne se livre à aucun acte qui ' porte atteinte à l’intégrité sexuelle d’une personne '. Ce qu’il y a lieu d’entendre par ' intégrité sexuelle ', dans le contexte de 25.1 n’a pas encore été précisé par les tribunaux et il est donc difficile de savoir si les actes de voyeurisme commis par la police dans le cadre de leurs fonctions seraient autorisés. Les actes de la police seraient également évalués au regard de la condition fixée à l’alinéa 25.1(8)c) qui exige en effet, que la police ait des motifs raisonnables de penser ' que la commission de l’acte ou de l’omission est, par rapport à la nature de l’infraction ou des activités criminelles faisant l’objet de l’enquête, juste et proportionnelle dans les circonstances, compte tenu notamment de la nature de l’acte ou de l’omission, de la nature de l’enquête ainsi que des solutions de rechange acceptables pour s’acquitter de ses fonctions d’application de la loi '." (pp. 13-14)

"...What Bill C-24 does represent is a total rejection of what the law was up to its coming into force.

    Bill C-24 will be unable to have any significant impact on the historical mechanisms used.  The litany of other means available to address the issues surrounding police misconduct will continue to be employed.  Through the common law legal reasoning, common law defences, statutory immunities, other investigative techniques and the reality of just what kinds of undercover operations are being conducted, only a very small portion of undercover activity will be touched by this new legislation.  This limited applicability causes one to consider just what truly motivated this legislation.  While Bill C-24 addresses the one dimensional aspect of police misconduct, that being the actual conduct, it provides nothing for the host of issues surrounding police misconduct.  Issues such as the admissibility of evidence, an abuse of process and the inability or ability of an undercover police operative to be criminally charged will remain virtually unchanged.  The police immunity provisions contained in Bill C-24's most redeeming quality may be that it essentially conforms to the body of law which it was created to rectify.

    By attempting to solve a problem where none existed, the police immunity provisions of Bill C-24 could be considered merely redundant.  If this was the extent of the impact of the police immunity provisions of Bill C-24 then the argument that these provisions were unnecessary would be less compelling.   Pragmatically speaking, the net effect of no real substantive change can hardly  draw intense criticism.  However, when one considers its potential to capture techniques which were previously outside the realm of police misconduct, the net effect moves much closer to harmful.  By overly broad definitions, Bill C-24 may in effect limit the scope of the advanced undercover technique.  Add to that the potential increase in the level of violence which may be required of undercover operatives, and the police immunity provisions may be more harmful.  At the price of bringing virtually nothing of substance to the issues surrounding police misconduct, the end result is a reduction of effectivenesss of the  undercover technique coupled with a fundamental shift away from judicial review.  One can hardly arrive at any other conclusion than that Bill C-24's police immunity provisions were unnecessary, provide only a marginal increase in protection for police misconduct and will have a far-reaching, negative impact on law enforcement's ability to conduct undercover operations." (pp. 90-91)

Federal

•An Act to amend the Criminal Code (organized crime and law enforcement) and to make consequential amendments to other Acts), Statutes of Canada 2001, chapter 32 (Bill C-24, 37th Parliament, 1st session); also published in French/aussi publié en français: CANADA, Parlement, Loi modifiant le Code criminel (crime organisé et application de la loi) et d’autres lois en conséquence, Lois du Canada (2001), chapitre 32 (Projet de loi C-24, 37^e Parlement, 1^re session);

Text/Texte:
• www.parl.gc.ca/PDF/37/1/parlbus/chambus/house/bills/government/C-24_4.pdf (accessed on 5 July 2006)
• canadagazette.gc.ca/partIII/2002/g3-02405.pdf (accessed on 5 July 2006)
• www.canlii.org/ca/as/2001/c32/  (accessed on 5 July 2006)
• laws.justice.gc.ca/en/2001/32/15915.html (accessed on 5 July 2006)

LEGISinfo  -- important
• www.parl.gc.ca/LEGISINFO/index.asp?Language=E&Session=9&query=2878&List=toc (accessed on 12 July 2006)

• Criminal Code, R.S., c. C-46 / Code criminel, L.R., ch. C-46

• Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, 1996, c. 19 / Loi réglementant certaines drogues et autres substances, 1996, ch. 19

• Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (Police Enforcement) Regulations, SOR/97-234, registered 22 April 1997, as amended / Règlement sur l’exécution policière de la Loi réglementant certaines drogues et autres substances, DORS/97-234, enregistré le 22 avril 1997, tel que modifié

Provincial

• NOVA SCOTIA, Cross-border Policing Act, 2005, c. 4, paragarph 4(3)(g), www.gov.ns.ca/legislature/legc/PDFs/annual%20statutes/2005/c004.pdf
• SASKATCHEWAN, The Police Act 1990, see paragraph 80.21(3)(g), /www.qp.gov.sk.ca/documents/English/Statutes/Statutes/P15-01.pdf

"Finally, in R. v. Campbell and Shirose, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 565, the Supreme Court ruled that police involvement in a “reverse sting operation” conducted in the course of a drug investigation was illegal and not authorized at common law. The principles of this case apply to any police investigation, and most importantly, apply to police officers committing illegal acts while engaged in undercover operations. The result has been a complex legislative scheme (s. 25.1 of the Criminal Code), both cumbersome and inefficient in terms of imposing additional financial and administrative burdens, where, in the absence of exigent circumstances, before an illegal act may be committed (even a minor one), a “competent authority” (e.g., the Solicitor General of Canada in the case of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police) must designate a “senior official” who designates a “public officer” to commit an offence (under rigorously delineated conditions and reporting requirements).

If these judicial decisions are pegged along a timeline, one can see how the service demands on police operations are compounding over time." (pp. 59-60)

"STUDENT ABSTRACT: This thesis debates the merits of Bill C-24 and the resulting amendments to Section 25 of the Canadian Criminal Code. Bill C-24 makes it possible for enforcement personnel and other designated officials to pursue investigations without having their actions fall within the scope of criminal law. Two major events, the Supreme Court ruling of 'R. v. Campbell  and Shirose' and the increased criminal activities of Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs,significantly influenced the creation of Bill C-24. The controversy surrounding Bill C-24 is examined in relation to victim rights, undercover policing, police corruption, and the lack of  measures to guide the use of the powers provided by the bill.  The thesis demonstrates that the implementation of Bill C-24 was neither systematic nor well thought through, and as a consequence, the potential areas for misuse of the Bill are many. It concludes with a number of recommendations arguing for stronger internal and external controls, the increased use of measures aimed at curbing police corruption and, finally, the need for future study and research." (souirce: AMICUS catalogue, Library and Archives Canada)

8 May 2001 --Evidence / 8 mai 2001 -- témoignages
• Anne McLellan, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada (E -- meeting 11) / Ministre de la Justice et procureure générale du Canada
•  Lawrence MacAulay, Solicitor General of Canada  (E -- meeting 11) / Solliciteur général du Canada (F -- réunion 11)
• Yvan Roy, Senior General Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada  (E -- meeting 11) / Conseiller juridique principal, Section de la politique en matière de droit pénal, ministère de la Justice Canada (F -- réunion 11)
•  Paul Kennedy, Senior Assistant Deputy Solicitor General, Policing and Security Branch., Department of the Solicitor General of Canada  (E -- meeting 11) / Sous-solliciteur général adjoint principal, Secteur de la police et sécurité, Ministère du Solliciteur général du Canada (F -- réunion 11)

• Me Carole Brosseau, Lawyer, Research & Legislation, Barreau du Québec (E -- meeting 12) / avocate, Recherche et législation, Barreau du Québec (F -- réunion 12)
• Me Anne-Marie Boisvert, Lawyer, Barreau du Québec  (E -- meeting 12) / avocate, Barreau du Québec (F -- réunion 12)
• A. Alan Borovoy, General Counsel., Canadian Civil Liberties Association  (E -- meeting 12) / conseiller général, l'Association canadienne des libertés civiles (F -- réunion 12)

• Dave Douglas, Chief Officer, Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia (E -- meeting 13) / Agent en chef, Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia (F -- réunion 13)
• Mike Ryan, Inspector, Proceeds of Crime Division, Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia (E -- meeting 13) /  Inspecteur, Division des produits de la criminalité, Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia (F -- réunion 13)
• Mike Niebudek, Vice-President, Canadian Police Association  and President, Ontario Association of Mounted Police (E -- meeting 13) / Vice-président, Association canadienne des policiers et policières  et président de l'Association ontarienne de la police montée (F -- réunion 13)
• Yves Prud'homme, President, Fédération des policiers et policières municipaux du Québec, Canadian Police Association (E -- meeting 13) / Président, Fédération des policiers et policières municipaux du Québec, Association canadienne des policiers et policières (F -- réunion 13)
• Joan Bercovich, Senior Director, Legal and Governmental Affairs, Canadian Bar Association (E -- meeting 13) / Directrice principale, Affaires juridiques et gouvernementales, Association du Barreau canadien (F -- réunion 13)
• Greg DelBigio, Member, National Criminal Justice Section, Canadian Bar Association (E -- meeting 13) / membre, Section nationale de justice pénale, Association du Barreau canadien (F -- réunion 13)

10 May 2001 --Evidence / 10 mai 2001 -- témoignages
• Guiliano Zaccardelli, Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police (E -- meeting 15) / Commissaire, Gendarmerie royale du Canada (F -- réunion 15)
• Julian Fantino, Chief, Toronto Police Service (E -- meeting 15) / Chef, Service de police de Toronto (F -- réunion 15)
• Jack Ewatski, Chief, Winnipeg Police Service  (E -- meeting 15) /Chef, Service de police de Winnipeg (F -- réunion 15)
• Irwin Koziebrocki, Vice-President, Criminal Lawyers' Association  (E -- meeting 15) / Vice-président, Criminal Lawyers' Association (F -- réunion 15)
• Michael Lomer, Secretary, Criminal Lawyers' Association  (E -- meeting 15) / Secrétaire, Criminal Lawyers' Association (F -- réunion 15)

15 May 2001 --Evidence / 15 mai 2001 -- témoignages
•  Marc St-Laurent, Assistant Director, Criminal Investigation Directorate, Service de police de la communauté urbaine de Montréal (E -- meeting 16) / Directeur adjoint, Direction des enquêtes criminelles, Service de police de la communauté urbaine de Montréal (F -- réunion 16)
•  Denis Asselin, Director, Legal Affairs Division, Service de police de la communauté urbaine de Montréal (E -- meeting 16) / Directeur, Division des affaires juridiques, Service de police de la communauté urbaine de Montréal (F -- réunion 16)
•  Bill Marra, Councillor, Federation of Canadian Municipalities (E -- meeting 16) / Conseiller, Fédération canadienne des municipailités (F -- réunion 16)
•  Stéphanie McFayden, Policy Analyst, Federation of Canadian Municipalities (E -- meeting 16) / Analyste des politiques, Fédération canadienne des municipailités (F -- réunion 16)
•  Pierre Gingras, Mayor of Blainville, Federation of Canadian Municipalities (E -- meeting 16) / Maire de Blainville, Fédération canadienne des municipailités (F -- réunion 16)
•  William M. Trudell, Chair, Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers (E -- meeting 16) / Président, Conseil canadien des avocats de la défense (F -- réunion 16)

• Yvan Roy, Senior General Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada (E -- meeting 17) / Avocat-conseil général, Section de la politique en matière de droit pénal, Ministère de la Justice Canada (F -- réunion 17)
• Stanley Cohen, Senior General Counsel, Human Rights Law Section, Department of Justice Canada (E -- meeting 17) / Avocat-conseil général, Section de la politique en matière de droit pénal, Ministère de la Justice Canada (F -- réunion 17)
• William C. Bartlett, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada (E -- meeting 17) / conseiller juridique, Section de la politique en matière de droit pénal, Ministère de la Justice Canada (F -- réunion 17)
•  R.G. Bob Lesser, Chief Superintendent, Officer in Charge, Drug Enforcement Branch, Federal Services Directorate, Royal Mounted Police of Canada (RCMP) (E -- meeting 17) / surintendant principal, officier responsable, Sous-direction de la police des drogues, Direction des services fédéraux, Gendarmerie royale du Canada (GRC) (F -- réunion 17)

29 May 2001 --Evidence / 15 mai 2001 -- témoignages
• Richard G. Mosley, Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy Sector, Department of Justice Canada (E -- meeting 19) / Richard G. Mosley, sous-ministre adjoint, Secteur des politiques, Ministère de la Justice Canada  (F -- réunion 19)

29 May 2001 --Report  / 29 mai 2001 -- Rapport
• (E)  /  (F)

9 May 2006 --Evidence / 9 mai 2006 -- témoignages
• Scromeda, Shawn, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice (E)  / Avocat, Section de la politique en matière de droit pénal, ministère de la Justice (F)

• McKey, Erin, Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice (E)  / Avocat-conseil, Section de la politique en matière de droit pénal, ministère de la Justice (F)

• Zigayer, Michael, Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice (E)  / Avocat-conseil, Section de la politique en matière de droit pénal, ministère de la Justice (F)

30 May 2006 -- Evidence / 30 mai 2006 -- témoignages
• MacKillop, Barry, Senior Director, National Strategies Division, Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada (E)  / Directeur principal, Division des stratégies nationales, Ministère de la Sécurité publique et protection civile Canada (F)
• Souccar, Raf, Assistant Commissioner, Federal and International Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police (E) / commissaire adjoint, Opérations fédérales et internationales, Gendarmerie royale du Canada (F)    
• Bucher, Thomas, Director, Organized Crime, Federal and International Operations, Royal Canadian Mounted Police (E) / Directeur, crime organisé, Opérations fédérales et internationales, Gendarmerie royale du Canada (F) 

1 June 2006 -- Evidence / 1er juin 2006 -- témoignages
• Copeland, Peter, Representative, Criminal Lawyers' Association (E)  / représentant, Criminal lawyrs' Association (F)

6 June 2006 -- Evidence / 6 juin 2006 -- témoignages
• Webber, Grégoire, Trudeau Scholar, Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation, Oxford University, As an Individual (E) / Boursier Trudeau, Fondation Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Université Oxford, à titre personnel (F)

8 June 2006 -- Evidence / 8 juin 2006 -- témoignages
• Thomson, Tamra, Director, Legislation and Law Reform, Canadian Bar Association  (E) / Directrice, Législation et réforme du droit, Association du Barreau Canadien (F)
• DelBigio, Gregory, Chair, National Criminal Justice Section, Canadian Bar Association (E)  / Président, National Criminal justice Section, Association du Barreau canadien (F)
• Barrette, Denis, Legal Counsel, Ligue des droits et libertés (E) / Conseiller juridique, Ligue des droits et libertés (F)
•  Fortin-Legris, Pierre-Louis, Case Officer, Ligue des droits et libertés (E) / Chargé des dossiers, Ligue des droits et libertés (F)

13 June 2006 -- Evidence / 13 juin 2006 -- témoignages
• Wood, Alexi, Director, Program Safety Project, Canadian Civil Liberties Association (E) /  Directrice, programme de sécurité, Association canadienne des libertés civiles (F)
• Swan, Ken, Representative, Canadian Civil Liberties Association (E) /Représentant, Association canadienne des libertés civiles (F)
• LeRoy, Jeanine, Representative, Criminal Law Chambers, Canadian Council of Criminal defence Lawyers (E) /  Représentante, Criminal Law Chambers, Canadian Council of Criminal defence Lawyers (F)

21 June 2006 -- Report 1 (interim report) / 21 juin 2006 -- Rapport 1 (rapport intérimaire)
• Report 1 (interim report) -- Review of Sections 25.1 to 25.4 of the Criminal Code (protection of persons administering and enforcing the law), adopted by the Committee on 21 June 2001 and tabled in the House of Commons on 22 June 2006, available at http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/CommitteePublication.aspx?COM=10474&Lang=1&SourceId=150853 (accessed on 22 September 2006); also published in French / aussi publié en français: Rapport 1 (rapport intérimaire) -- Revue des articles 25.1 à 25.4 du Code criminel (protection des personnes chargées de l'application et de l'exécution de la loi), adopté par le Comité le 21 juin 2006 et  présenté à la Chambre des communes, le 22 juin 2006, disponible à http://cmte.parl.gc.ca/cmte/CommitteePublication.aspx?COM=10474&SourceId=150853&SwitchLanguage=1 (site visité le 22 septembre 2006);

21 November 2001 --Evidence / 21 novembre 2001 -- témoignages

• The Honourable Anne McLellan, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada (E) / Ministre de la Justice et procureure générale du Canada (F)
• The Honourable Lawrence MacAulay, Solicitor General of Canada (E) / Solliciteur général du Canada (F)
• Mr. Richard G. Mosley, Assistant Deputy Minister, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice (E)  / Sous-ministre adjoint, Division des politiques et du droit criminel, ministère de la Justice (F)
• Mr. Paul Kennedy, Senior Assistant Deputy Solicitor General (E)  / Solliciteur général adjoint principal (F)
• Mr. Michel Auger, Journalist, Legal and Criminal Affairs Expert, Journal de Montréal (E)  / Journaliste, spécialiste des affaires judiciaires et criminelles au Journal de Montréal (F)
• Mr. Antonio Nicaso, Journalist, Author (E) / Journaliste, auteur (F)
• Mr. Giuliano Zaccardelli, Commissioner, Royal Canadian Mounted Police (E) / Commissaire, Gendarmerie royale du Canada (F)
• Mr. Vince Westwick, General Counsel, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (E) / Avocat général, Association canadienne des chefs de police (F)
• Mr. Julian Fantino, Chief, Toronto Police Service, Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police (E) / Chef, Service de police de Toronto, Association canadienne des chefs de police (F)
• Mr. Mike Niebudek, Vice-President, Canadian Police Association (E)  / Vice-président, Association canadienne de la police (F)
• Mr. Yves Prud'homme, President, Fédération des policiers et policières municipaux du Québec (E) / Président, Fédération des policiers et policières municipaux du Québec (F)
• Mr. Denis Roy, Director, Sûreté municipale, municipalité de Granby(E) / Directeur de la Sûreté municipale, municipalité de Granby (F)

November 2001 --Evidence / 22 novembre 2001 -- témoignages
• Ms Heather Perkins-McVey, Chair, National Criminal Justice Section, Canadian Bar Association (E) / Présidente de la Section nationale du droit pénal, Association du Barreau canadien (F)
• Ms Tamra Thomson, Director, Legislation and Law Reform, Canadian Bar Association (E) / Tamra Thomson, directrice, Législation et réforme du droit, Association du Barreau canadien (F)
• Ms Carole Brosseau, Lawyer, Research and Legislation, Barreau du Québec (E) / Avocate, Service de recherche et législation, Barreau du Québec (F)
• Ms Anne-Marie Boisvert, Chair of the Criminal Law Committee, Barreau du Québec (E) / Présidente du Comité sur le droit criminel, Barreau du Québec (F)
• Mr. William M. Trudell, Chair, Canadian Council of Criminal Defence Lawyers (E) / Président, Conseil canadien des avocats de la défense (F)
• Mr. Michael Lomer, Counsel, Criminal Lawyers' Association (E) / Avocat, Criminal Lawyers' Association (F)

28 November 2001 --Evidence / 28 novembre 2001 -- témoignages
• Mr. Denis Asselin, Counsel, Deputy Chief, Head, Legal Affairs Division, Montreal Urban Community Police Department (E) / Avocat, assistant-directeur, chef de la Division des affaires juridiques, Service de police de la Communauté urbaine de Montréal (SPCUM) (F)
• Mr. Marc St-Laurent, Assistant Director, Division of Investigation, Montreal Urban Community Police Department  (E) / Assistant-directeur, Division des enquêtes, Service de police de la Communauté urbaine de Montréal (SPCUM) (F)
• Mr. Frank Ryder, Detective Chief, Superintendent, Ontario Provincial Police  (E) / Détective, surintendant en chef, Police provinciale de l'Ontario (F)
• Mr. Dennis Moore, Detective Superintendent, Organized Crime Unit, Ontario Provincial Police  (E) / Surintendant-détective, Unité du crime organisé, Police provinciale de l'Ontario (F)
• Mr. Mike Ryan, Inspector, Organized Crime Agency, British Columbia  (E) /  Inspecteur, Organized Crime Agency of British Columbia (F)
• Mr. Guy Ouellette, Specialist in Criminalized Biker Gangs, as an individual  (E) / Spécialiste des bandes de motards criminalisés, à titre individuel (F)
• Mr.Yves Lavigne, Journalist, as an individual (E) / Journaliste, à titre individuel (F)
• Ms Louise Viau, Law Professor, Université de Montréal  (E) / Professeure de droit, Université de Montréal (F)
• Mr. Richard Mosley, Assistant Deputy Minister, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada  (E) / Sous-ministre adjoint, Division des politiques en matière de droit pénal, Ministère de la Justice Canada (F)
• Mr. William Bartlett, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada  (E) / Avocat, Division des politiques en matière de droit pénal, Ministère de la Justice Canada (F)
• Mr. Shalin Sugunasiri, Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada  (E) / Avocat, Division des politiques en matière de droit pénal, Ministère de la Justice Canada (F)
• Mr. Paul Kennedy, Senior Assistant Deputy Solicitor General, Office of SADSG, Police and Security, Department of the Solcitor General of Canada  (E) / Sous-solliciteur général adjoint principal, Bureau du SSGAS, Police et sécurité, Ministère du Solliciteur général du Canada (F)

29 November 2001 --Evidence / 29 novembre 2001 -- témoignages
• Michael Zigayer, Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice Canada (E)  / Avocat principal, Secteur de la politique en matière de droit pénal, ministère de la Justice Canadal (F)

4 December 2001 --Report  /  4 décembre 2001 -- Rapport
•  (E) / (F)

"59    It is helpful to examine the context in which the decision in Morielli was rendered to fully understand the reasoning behind it.  Unlike the present case, which concerns charges of laundering the proceeds of an individual’s crime, Morielli dealt with an application brought by the accused in relation to the illegality of a police investigation in which police officers operated a currency exchange office to identify criminal organizations engaged in importing and trafficking in narcotics.  In Morielli, proof of an intent to hide the criminal origins of the converted money had been presented to exclude the possibility that the police involved in the operation were not in turn found guilty.  I note in this regard that amendments have since been made to s. 25.1(8) of the Criminal Code authorizing, on certain conditions, the commission of  'an act or omission — or . . . directing the commission of an act or omission . . . — that would otherwise constitute an offence'."

" La légalité de l'opération policière
[...]
[68]           À la lumière de ces faits, l'accusé ne peut certes prétendre avoir subi de graves violations de ses droits constitutionnels.  Les individus qui se sont présentés au comptoir l'ont fait librement et ont livré des informations aux enquêteurs sans jamais être mobilisés contre eux-mêmes.  Ils ont été dupés sans plus.  Quant à la supercherie elle-même, elle n'était pas disproportionnée aux enjeux.  Si l'on avait pu blâmer les policiers d'avoir usé de tels stratagèmes pour arrêter de petits trafiquants ou revendeurs, il est difficile de le faire dans le présent cas où se sont les têtes dirigeantes des organisations criminelles qui étaient visées.  Ceci est sans compter le fait que toute l'opération était souhaitée par les pays du G7.  Le seul reproche que l'on peut formuler à l'endroit des autorités policières est d'avoir ainsi encouragé l'achat de stupéfiants. Il faut cependant admettre que toute opération policière d'infiltration n'est pas sans comporter d'inconvénients ou d'effets indésirables.  Dans le présent cas, vu que c'est la trace des sommes elles-mêmes qui a permis d’arrêter les dirigeants, je crois que cet inconvénient est contrebalancé par la latitude qu'il est nécessaire de donner aux policiers afin de combattre les infractions consensuelles comme le trafic de la drogue.  Dans le contexte de cette opération policière, les moyens d'enquête utilisés étaient justifiés.
[...]
 La provocation policière
[...]
[78]           Enfin, toujours dans l’hypothèse d’une conclusion d’illégalité de l’opération policière, la preuve demeurait également admissible sour l’article 24(2) de la Charte.  Ni le facteur concernant la gravité de la violation [R. c. Kokesh 1990 IIJCan 55 (C.S.C.), [1990] 3 R.C.S. 3] ni celui de la déconsidération de la justice [R. c. Elshaw, [1991] 3 R.C.S.; R. c. Belnavis, [1997] 3 R.C.S. 223, par. 44 et 45] ou encore de l’équité du procès [R. c. Stillman, [1997] 1 R.C.S. 907] ne justifiaient, compte tenu des faits de l’espèce, l’inadmissibilité de la preuve."

"REPORT OF THE CHAIR
...
Law Enforcement and Criminal Liability -- White Paper, June 2000 

The Government White Paper, tabled in the Senate, June 22, 2000, along with draft legislative proposals was discussed by delegates.  Although the consultation process seeks comments by September 15, 2000, delegates were advised to carefully consider the issues and their comments would be received up to October 15, 2000.  Delegates representing the defence bar (CBA, Criminal Justice Section, CCCDL and Criminal Lawyers Association) noted concerns about the general principle of sanctioning any criminal offences and the scope of the proposed immunity.  The debate centered around the need to balance the risk to public safety with risks of increasing police powers.  A majority of delegates noted that despite the complexity of the issue, legislation was essential.

Department of Justice officials invited the CBA, CLA, CCCDL and Barreau de Québec to participate in focussed face-to-face consultations, in addition to encouraging written submissions." (www.ulcc.ca/en/poam2/index.cfm?sec=2000&sub=2000c), accessed on 8 July 2006)


"RAPPORT DU PRÉSIDENT
 [...]
Application de la loi et responsabilité pénale -- Livre blanc, juin 2000

Les délégués discutent du Livre blanc du gouvernement, déposé au Sénat le 22 juin 2000, et des propositions législatives provisoires. Dans le cadre du processus de consultation, les délégués étaient tenus de fournir leur avis avant le 15 septembre 2000. On leur indique toutefois qu’ils doivent bien examiner les questions et qu’ils ont dorénavant jusqu’au 15 octobre pour transmettre leurs commentaires. Ceux qui représentent les avocats de la défense (provenant de l’ABC, de la Section de la justice pénale, du CCAD et de la Criminal Lawyers Association) expriment leurs préoccupations quant au principe général de sanction des infractions criminelles et à l’étendue de l’immunité proposée. Le débat porte surtout sur la nécessité d’équilibrer les risques à la sécurité publique et les risques associés à l’accroissement des pouvoirs des policiers. La majorité des délégués estiment qu’une loi est nécessaire, malgré la complexité de la question.

Les représentants du ministère de la Justice invitent l’ABC, la CLA, le CCAD et le Barreau du Québec à participer à des consultations en personne et à présenter des propositions écrites."
(www.ulcc.ca/fr/poam2/index.cfm?sec=2000&sub=2000c), visité le 8 juillet 2006)
 

"The scant information currently available on the operation of the legislation does not suggest that our police are exploiting this new authority like a military junta. The police powers have only been invoked a handful of times, and the offences committed have been rather tame: possession of stolen property, possession of forged passports and uttering counterfeit documents."

"where no law exists authorising law enforcement officers to encourage or participate in the commission of criminal offences ... it is likely that the conduct which procures the commission of a criminal offence by another will itself be criminal." ((1995) 184 CLR 19, at 36, per Mason CJ, Deane and Dawson JJ.)
-------
"The criminal law has developed on the basis that criminal activity attaches if a person ‘intends to commit a crime and actually commits it’. And that is so no matter that the person concerned is acting for or on behalf of a law enforcement agency or some other arm of executive government. Thus, and as a matter of legal principle, law enforcement agents who engage in criminal activity are criminally liable for their actions and liable to punishment." ((1995) 184 CLR 19, at 73, per Gaudron J.)