Three originating applications challenged the constitutional validity of the gathering-order and sending-order regime under ss. 18 and 20 of the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act on the basis that the proceedings are presumptively ex parte.
The court held that s. 8 does not generally require inter partes proceedings at the investigative stage, and that the trans-border context does not alter the usual principles favouring confidentiality and expedition in criminal investigations.
Applying the contextual approach from Rodgers, the court found that the statutory scheme contains a broad array of judicial, ministerial, and remedial safeguards.
The absence of presumptive notice before a s. 20 sending order, and the inapplicability of Tse’s after-the-fact notice requirement, did not render the regime unconstitutional.
The applications were dismissed.
