Evidence of meeting #17 for Justice and Human Rights in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was journalists.
A recording is available from Parliament.
NDP
David Christopherson NDP Hamilton Centre, ON
Thank you.
I am very supportive of this, Chair. I'm from the home of Ken Peters and The Hamilton Spectator. That was a major case that I know Monsieur Ménard is familiar with. I've spoken in support of this in the House, but I didn't hear the witnesses, so it really would be wrong for me to engage in questions.
So I will pass, sir.
Conservative
Liberal
Derek Lee Liberal Scarborough—Rouge River, ON
I have a quick question, and perhaps the Department of Justice could take this on.
Is this new statutory codification of this in any sense comprehensive? Does it cover off everything it has to, or has it left things, components of this envelope, unaddressed so that even if we pass it as it is, the courts are still going to have to deal with chewing up the new code with unaddressed components of journalistic privilege that are left untouched?
I don't have a head for this, but you may have. If you can't answer it now but you can provide some kind of an answer, it would be helpful.
Counsel, Criminal Law Policy Section, Department of Justice
I might just indicate, in the interest of time, that one of the issues we've identified is that the provisions deal with search warrants, but they don't expressly address other forms of state-compelled evidence--like production orders, subpoenas, etc. The potential perhaps is raised that there might be some inconsistency between the way the courts dealt with that pursuant to the common law and then this codification.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Art Hanger
Thank you, Mr. Lee.
I would like to thank the witnesses for their appearance here. It's been good information to digest. Thank you.
The meeting is adjourned.