The accused brought a pre‑trial motion seeking production of underlying CSIS source materials reviewed in support of CSIS warrants issued under the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act.
The materials had informed disclosure and advisory letters later relied upon by police to obtain Criminal Code warrants in a terrorism investigation.
The court held that CSIS was a third party for disclosure purposes because its investigation was independent from the RCMP investigation.
Applying the O’Connor third‑party production framework, the court found the accused failed to establish that the requested materials were “likely relevant” to a Garofoli challenge to the RCMP warrants.
The application was characterized as a fishing expedition lacking an evidentiary foundation.
