The Crown brought a certiorari application seeking to quash a trial judge’s disclosure order requiring the Crown to facilitate defence contact with two witnesses who were the complainant’s brothers in a criminal harassment prosecution.
The Crown argued that the order effectively compelled the witnesses to speak with defence counsel and exceeded the trial judge’s jurisdiction.
The court held that the order did not compel the witnesses to participate but merely provided a mechanism for voluntary contact while protecting their autonomy and ability to seek legal advice.
The ruling arose in the context of a Stinchcombe disclosure application where potential relevance to the complainant’s subjective fear was established.
The court concluded the trial judge acted within jurisdiction and that the disclosure mechanism appropriately balanced defence rights with witness privacy.
