U.S.A. v. Wakeling

U.S.A. v. Wakeling

The Court held that s.193(2)(e) of the Criminal Code (and to the extent engaged, s.8(2)(f) of the Privacy Act) is constitutionally valid and does not infringe Charter ss.7 or 8. Lawfully intercepted communications carry a significantly diminished residual expectation of privacy; disclosure to designated foreign law enforcement or prosecutors 'in the interests of the administration of justice' is a discernible, judicially manageable standard when read in the context of Part VI safeguards. The statutory scheme as a whole strikes a reasonable balance between individual privacy and state interests in cross-border law enforcement, and the applicant's Charter challenge is dismissed.

Citation
2011 BCSC 165
Parties
Requesting State: The Attorney General of Canada on behalf of the United States of America; Extraditee: Andrew Gordon Wakeling; Intervener: Attorney General of British Columbia
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Extradition; Constitutional Challenge Under the Charter / Judgment on Charter Challenge During Extradition Committal Proceedings
Outcome
Application dismissed; Charter challenge to s.193(2)(e) and s.8(2)(f) refused
Legal Topics
Wiretapping, Intercepted Communications, Disclosure to Foreign Law Enforcement, Charter Ss.7 and 8, Privacy Act S.8(2)(f), Criminal Code S.193(2)(e), Vagueness and Overbreadth, Mutual Legal Assistance (mlacma), Rule of Law, Transparency and Accountability
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Privacy Law Extradition Law Administrative Law Wiretapping Intercepted Communications Disclosure to Foreign Law Enforcement +7 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 8 Authorities cited 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Attorney General of Canada on behalf of the United States of America

Requesting State

Andrew Gordon Wakeling

Extraditee

Attorney General of British Columbia

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Extradition; Constitutional Challenge Under the Charter / Judgment on Charter Challenge During Extradition Committal Proceedings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether s.193(2)(e) Criminal Code and s.8(2)(f) Privacy Act permit disclosure of intercepted communications to foreign law enforcement in a manner inconsistent with Charter ss.7 and 8
  2. 2 Whether transmission of lawfully intercepted communications to a foreign authority constitutes a search or seizure under s.8
  3. 3 Whether s.193(2)(e) is unconstitutionally vague or overbroad

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that s.193(2)(e) of the Criminal Code (and to the extent engaged, s.8(2)(f) of the Privacy Act) is constitutionally valid and does not infringe Charter ss.7 or 8. Lawfully intercepted communications carry a significantly diminished residual expectation of privacy; disclosure to designated foreign law enforcement or prosecutors 'in the interests of the administration of justice' is a discernible, judicially manageable standard when read in the context of Part VI safeguards. The statutory scheme as a whole strikes a reasonable balance between individual privacy and state interests in cross-border law enforcement, and the applicant's Charter challenge is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed; Charter challenge to s.193(2)(e) and s.8(2)(f) refused

Orders

  • Application dismissed