The Appellant, Ibrahim Tshibola, appealed his sexual assault conviction, arguing his s. 14 Charter right to a competent interpreter was violated.
He sought to admit fresh evidence from two independent interpreters detailing errors, omissions, and distortions in the trial interpretation, including issues with regional French dialects.
The court applied the Palmer test for fresh evidence, finding the evidence admissible and cogent, and that the due diligence requirement was satisfied given the compelling nature of the evidence and the defence counsel's inability to detect the issues at trial.
The court concluded that the interpretation fell below the constitutionally guaranteed standard, calling into question the integrity and fairness of the trial.
The appeal was granted, and a new trial ordered.
