Justice Committee on April 15th, 2010

[Brian Murphy, Liberal, Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, NB]

So that is 24 million.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

All right, we'll move on to Mr. Ménard for seven minutes.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Frankly, we have before us several witnesses with whom we could talk for days and days. For my part, I practiced criminal law for more than 25 years before the Stinchcombe decision. This is a little known fact because I was elected for the first time in 1993. I intend to put but a few questions to you, but I would have liked to have been able to ask you a hundred questions, including on the Stinchcombe decision, of which I had only limited knowledge, but that I had already heard talk of.

One thing is certain, the Stinchcombe decision brought about a considerable increase in the cost of police investigations, even if I understand why it came about. If I am not mistaken, this principle came to us from England, following the case of the Guildford Four.

[François Lacasse]

That certainly is one of the elements that influenced the court, but the disclosure principle could also be traced back to the civil domain.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

Yes, but it is based upon that incident and the investigation that followed that this was legislated in England. There have therefore been decisions that the Supreme Court relied upon.

Could you give us an assessment of this tremendous increase in the costs of police investigations that might be compensated for thanks to more frequent guilty pleas, given the clear evidence that can more often bring lawyers to file guilty pleas?

[Yvan Poulin]

I believe that a good management of the evidence and its disclosure at the outset have this effect. Without going into the details, because not everything has yet been tallied, for 101 accused persons, I believe that approximately 70 files are now complete, as we speak. The disclosure of organized evidence has had this impact. The accused see the evidence held by the prosecution. This evidence is organized so as to be readable, despite its large volume. This is what convinces those accused that, in the end, the best thing to do is to admit their guilt and negotiate in other areas, for example pleas and sentences. The effect is most certainly direct.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

We only have seven minutes each.

If I am not mistaken, this great initiative began in England. The Supreme Court drew its inspiration from English decisions. Are there many countries that do this? I imagine that Commonwealth countries and those of British tradition have adopted this process: Australia, New Zealand, the United States. But as for the other way of doing things, is there an equivalent, in France or in Germany?

[Yvan Poulin]

The international aspect falls under my colleague's area of expertise.

[François Lacasse]

There is a general move in this direction and I would point to the case of Italy which, in the 1980s, experienced the very first major trials brought against the Italian mafia. As you know, Italy functioned within the framework of a system that was inquisitorial in nature. Based on the experience of these trials, the government completely transformed its criminal process, rendering it more accusatorial in the early 1990s. That of course brings with it consequences, namely the disclosure of evidence and a greater role for the prosecuting attorneys, but also for the defence. You are probably aware of the fact that France is at present considering abolishing the role of the juge d'instruction or examining magistrate. As recently as last week, Haitian attorneys contacted me to sound me out and to inform me that they too are considering moving to the accusatorial mode, which necessarily means an evidence disclosure system of the type we now have.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

In summary, this is a worldwide trend and we must learn to live with it. The administration of justice has become incredibly complex compared with when I started practicing.

I would like to move now to FINTRAC, that intrigues me. We hear talk of, and there is certainly use of, certain money laundering techniques. A rather famous lawyer made no secret of it. He was probably one of the richest in the profession. He boasted about his luck at the casino. Every time he went on holiday, he always went to the casino and came back with hundreds of thousands of dollars. Everyone saw through his little game and imagined him buying tens of thousands of dollars' worth of chips and gambling. After a bit, he would go back to the cashier and have the casino issue him a cheque. What can you do in that type of situation?

[Denis Meunier]

It so happens that the information we get is provided by the casinos, that are required to report on the purchases that gamblers can make. Furthermore, since September 28, 2009, we have been receiving the casino disbursement reports. This is an instrument that now allows us to collate the purchases, the disbursements and also to analyze them. With regard to foreign countries, it is always possible for us to obtain intelligence. If the police has information and willingly provides it to us, it is always possible for us to obtain intelligence with regard to investigations that could be undertaken in another country.

[Serge Ménard, Bloc, Marc-Aurèle-Fortin, QC]

You realize that in today's world there are casinos all over the place. Numerous countries consider that it is a way for them to make money. There are casinos aboard ships. Are your relations as broad as that?

[Denis Meunier]

At present, we have with our international partners 62 memorandums of understanding relating to intelligence sharing and this allows us to extend our detection network to the international scale.

[The Chair, Conservative, Ed Fast]

Thank you.

We'll move on to Mr. Comartin for seven minutes.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

Thank you for being here.

Let me start with FINTRAC, just to follow that up.

Mr. Meunier, you told us about the 24 million reports you get a year. Does that include the international ones?

[Denis Meunier]

That includes the international wire transfers.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

In terms of the analysis that you do, do you break it down? I'm asking whether it is your office, Ms. Goulet, that breaks it down between what you suspect is terrorist financial activity versus what you suspect is crime or organized crime. Do you break that down yourself, or do you leave that up to police forces?

[Denis Meunier]

The information that comes to us is basically on financial transactions, and we have the capability to make judgments about those financial transactions. And when we reach reasonable grounds to suspect money laundering or terrorist financing, there are different patterns that are used in those that we have come to recognize and that other financial intelligence units across the world have more or less agreed are red flags, patterns that are associated with terrorist financing and/or money laundering, but to be frank with you, there is a commonality between those methods in many cases.

If you take a look at our annual report last year, you'll see that there's a good proportion of cases we've disclosed to police that include both terrorist financing and money laundering.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

If I can pursue that, when you transfer that information to police, do you say you believe this is combined, or it's exclusively terrorist-originating, or exclusively straight criminal-originating?

[Denis Meunier]

We would disclose to police on the basis of the various sections of the law that basically identify reasonable suspicions for one and the other, and if it was information that came from us, we originated the case, we would provide the information to a police force as well as CSIS and we would let them figure it out.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

So I'm assuming that at times the information you're transferring will go both to CSIS and to a police force.

[Denis Meunier]

Yes. CSIS would get it in those cases where we believe there's a threat to the security of Canada.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

In terms of the police force, is it exclusively RCMP, or is it other police forces as well?

[Denis Meunier]

“Appropriate police forces” is what the legislation says, and that would mean the police force of jurisdiction where we believe the suspected activity is taking place.

[Joe Comartin, NDP, Windsor—Tecumseh, ON]

So if it's national, it would automatically go to the RCMP?