I would like the list to be as complete as possible.
Evidence of meeting #2 for Justice and Human Rights in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was officer.
Evidence of meeting #2 for Justice and Human Rights in the 39th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was officer.
5:05 p.m.
Bloc
Réal Ménard Bloc Hochelaga, QC
There was no generic example, I guess that will have to wait until next time.
5:05 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
I did give generic examples in my overview. I would prefer to leave the question of operational scenarios and how this happens operationally to police witnesses who may appear. I think they would be in the best position to answer.
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Conservative
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
On the scope of the act, the parties that may have the benefit of the act will include, as you said, police under provincial and municipal jurisdictions. As we go to look for the annual reports of the designations, I assume we can cover off the federal--which is rather easy, because the public safety minister has tabled the report--but we have to look to each provincial attorney general for reports made public in those jurisdictions. Then, because it can involve any peace officer in a federal jurisdiction, we've got to look to each separate federal minister whose ministry includes peace officers. That could include Fisheries and Oceans Canada and Parks Canada and...I don't know what to list.
That is not to say any of those ministries has actually used designations yet, but some may have, and we're unaware of those public reports--at least, I'm not aware of them.
So we will have to look there, or at least ask there. Is that correct?
5:05 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
We can assist in that process. I do have with me some of the provincial reports. I'm not sure I have every single one, but I think I have most of them. There was a question earlier about materials we'll be sharing with the committee; I think we can gather most or all of that together for you.
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Has the system evolved to the point that in the case of any federal minister whose officials would have made use of this section, a report would have percolated to the top and the federal minister would have made an annual report?
5:05 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
The only other federal--
5:05 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
An example is Fisheries and Oceans Canada. I believe they have powers of arrest there.
5:05 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
In fact, Fisheries and Oceans Canada is the example, and Michael Zigayer gave it. It is the only federal department that I know has proceeded toward a designation process. I actually can't confirm that it made designations and I'm not sure yet if the department's minister has issued a public report, but it is the only one we're aware of that has approached us. That will be part of the further information.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
I suppose that if we were to recommend an amendment, we might want to consider, in terms of public reporting, trying to consolidate some of the reporting. But we can get to that later.
My last question is along the same lines. These designations would also be available to peace officers present in the integrated border enforcement teams and the integrated national security enforcement teams, the IBETs and INSETs, which would have multi-jurisdictional connections and their own undercover operations, but I'm not sure who we would look to for reporting. Have you given any thought to that?
5:10 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
The reporting requirements are set out relatively clearly in the legislation.
Just so that people aren't caught by surprise with respect to an annual report, there is only a need for an annual report if the provisions that trigger the requirement for senior official approval have been triggered. There may be a force that is designated that hasn't had to avail themselves of those provisions, and there wouldn't be a requirement for a report. It's where the particular conduct that was of concern during the passage of the legislation comes into play and the senior official is implicated that triggers reporting requirements.
With respect to who files reports, it's the minister responsible. It is the competent authority responsible for the police officers who were engaged in that conduct who has the obligation to file a report. And yes, to the extent there are police officers participating in integrated units, such as IBETs or INSETs, they would be eligible for the designation.
5:10 p.m.
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
Once they've been designated, they could authorize a third party who could take advantage of the provision...?
5:10 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
In accordance with the statutory requirements.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Myron Thompson Conservative Wild Rose, AB
In regard to the training of regular citizens, I'm thinking there is a pretty broad spectrum out in my riding. With Rural Crime Watch, we've come upon some very interesting situations. Would there be any need, in your view, to think about them as part of this training exercise?
5:10 p.m.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
In terms of who the police forces and other law enforcement agencies have suggested for training, we have responded to their own assessments of training needs. I don't think I could provide an answer to that. We would be responsive to their own assessments of whether they are likely to need training to take advantage of these provisions and to ever be designated under them. I'm not aware of anything having been done along that line.
5:10 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
As far as I'm aware, the Department of Justice has responded positively to every request for training that we've received.
5:10 p.m.
Senior Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
I have one last little word.
For community groups, which is where I think you were coming from, we could provide our CD to the community group. It's essentially a briefing or an explanation of the whole of Bill C-24, the organized crime bill that was enacted at the end of 2001. It provides a sketch of what you've seen today.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
Myron Thompson Conservative Wild Rose, AB
I think they would probably be interested in getting something like that. If I can get a double order of it, I'll spread it around.
5:10 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Art Hanger
Are there any other questions for the Department of Justice? I have one that I would like to put, since these are the folks who actually drafted this legislation.
In years past, a police officer would be rated on his act, or his judgment, on reasonable and probable grounds. This terminology doesn't seem to exist anywhere in this legislation—although maybe that's intended, I don't know. But if a police officer believes he's acting on reasonable grounds, his act has to be “reasonable and proportional” in the circumstances.
Could you explain that to me? I guess I'm having a problem understanding how a judgment can be made on a police officer acting in good faith, if he is judged on these grounds. Who is to do this judging or examination of his act? Obviously there was some thought given to that. Having been in the position of an undercover investigator at one time, I can see that this would be a substantial issue in a court.
