During an extradition hearing, the appellant disclosed in camera that he was a confidential police informer.
The extradition judge appointed an amicus curiae and subsequently ordered that media counsel and representatives be granted access to the amicus documents, subject to confidentiality undertakings, to argue whether the proceedings should remain in camera.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the appeal, holding that informer privilege is absolute and non-discretionary, subject only to the innocence at stake exception.
The Dagenais/Mentuck test for discretionary publication bans does not apply.
The extradition judge erred in ordering the disclosure of privileged information to the media.
