Criminal Code of Canada - section 199(4) - When declaration or direction may be made

section 199(4)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

No declaration or direction can be made regarding anything seized under this section until it is no longer required as evidence or 30 days have passed.

SECTION WORDING

199(4) No declaration or direction shall be made pursuant to subsection (3) in respect of anything seized under this section until (a) it is no longer required as evidence in any proceedings that are instituted pursuant to the seizure; or (b) the expiration of thirty days from the time of seizure where it is not required as evidence in any proceedings.

EXPLANATION

Section 199(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the seizure of property under Section 199(1) by peace officers in the course of an investigation or arrest. This section lays out the circumstances under which a declaration or direction can be made with regards to the seized property. Subsection (3) of Section 199 allows for a justice or a judge to make a declaration or direction regarding the possession, disposition, or preservation of the seized property. However, Subsection (4) stipulates that such a declaration or direction cannot be made until either the property is no longer required as evidence in any ongoing legal proceedings related to the seizure, or 30 days have passed from the time of the seizure. This provision is meant to protect the rights of property owners who may have had their possessions seized by the police during an investigation. It ensures that the property cannot be disposed of or transferred until it is no longer required as evidence, or a reasonable amount of time has passed. This also allows for property owners to make claims to recover their seized property within the 30-day period. Overall, Section 199(4) ensures that the seizure of property by the police is subject to legal restrictions and safeguards, in order to prevent arbitrary or unwarranted confiscation of citizens' possessions.

COMMENTARY

Section 199(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada lays down specific guidelines for the handling of items seized under section 199 of the Code. This section assumes significance in light of the frequent conflicts between the police and members of the public, specifically regarding the seizure and retention of private property belonging to individuals being investigated for criminal offences. Section 199 empowers police officers to search for and seize private property when investigating certain serious offences. The critical importance of such provisions is to ensure that police officers have the necessary powers to investigate crime effectively. The balance must also be struck between the powers of the authorities and the rights of the individuals. Section 199(4) prescribes two specific scenarios for the handling of items seized under section 199 of the Code. Firstly, where the items seized are evidence required in any proceedings instituted pursuant to the seizure; in such cases, the declaration or direction in respect of such items may not be made until such time as the items are no longer required as evidence. Secondly, where the items seized are not required as evidence in any proceedings; in such cases, the declaration or direction in respect of such items may not be made until the expiration of thirty days from the time of seizure. This section ensures that the property belonging to individuals being investigated is not retained indefinitely by the authorities, thereby providing a level of protection to the interests of those investigated. The critical point to consider is the balance between the powers of the authorities and the rights of individuals. The state must have the power to investigate crime effectively, which entails, at times, seizing the property related to the crime being investigated. However, the rights of the individuals whose property is seized must be protected. In this regard, Section 199(4) of the Criminal Code strikes a balance between the powers of the authorities and the rights of individuals. The second scenario outlined in Section 199(4) is particularly significant, wherein items seized are not required as evidence in any proceedings. In such cases, the authorities must release the seized items within thirty days from the time of seizure. This provision enables a level of protection for individuals whose property was seized but ultimately did not contribute to the prosecution of any criminal offence. This provision of the law aims to prevent the retention of such property, thus mitigating the risk of abuse of power by the authorities. However, it must be noted that the standards for retaining items seized under section 199 may differ in other jurisdictions, and some laws provide for longer periods of retention of such property. Nonetheless, Section 199(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides clear guidance on the handling of property seized under section 199. In conclusion, Section 199 of the Criminal Code of Canada grants the authorities powers to search for and seize property related to criminal investigations. Such provisions are essential for the effective investigation of crime. Nonetheless, it must be balanced against the rights of individuals whose property may be seized. Section 199(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada strikes this balance by outlining specific guidelines for the handling of seized property. Specifically, Section 199(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada, restricts the authorities from retaining items seized indefinitely, thereby providing a level of protection to the interests of those investigated. The provisions of this section of the Criminal Code enable a balance between the powers of the state and the rights of individuals.

STRATEGY

Section 199(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada lays down certain considerations that need to be taken into account while dealing with the seizure of any item under this section. The section mandates that no declaration or direction shall be made unless the seized item is no longer required as evidence in any proceedings or the item is not required as evidence after thirty days from the time of seizure. As such, the section possesses serious implications for individuals, corporations, and defense lawyers who may be concerned with maintaining control over seized items. One of the primary strategic considerations in this context is the importance of prompt action. As per the section 199(4), if an item is no longer required as evidence within thirty days of seizure, it can be released back to its owner. Therefore, it is imperative for the lawyers representing the accused to take swift action to segregate and classify items that may not be required in any proceedings. This ensures that the items can be released as soon as possible, preventing unnecessary delays and preserving the reputation of clients. Another strategic consideration for lawyers is the possibility of delayed court proceedings. In many cases, court proceedings can take months or even years to conclude. As such, items seized under the section 199(4) can be held in legal custody for an extended period of time, often leading to the potential for damage or loss. Legal teams need to be aware of this possibility and should explore the possibility of alternative storage arrangements. Furthermore, given the implications of section 199(4), lawyers representing plaintiffs or defendants need to be proactive about documenting all necessary information regarding the seized item at the time of seizure. This includes technical specifications, any relevant variables, and any other relevant details regarding the item's condition and provenance. This information is essential in demonstrating why the item seized does not require to be held in court proceedings and ensuring that it is released as soon as possible. Strategically, legal teams can employ various strategies to deal with section 199(4), including the exploration of alternative arrangements for the storage of seized items. Lawyers can also explore opportunities to negotiate with relevant authorities to seek waivers based on the circumstances of the case. For instance, if the seized item has no relevance to the case proceedings, lawyers can make a persuasive argument for its release. Lawyers can also explore the possibility of seeking orders restraining authorities from seizing items without sufficient cause. In conclusion, while dealing with section 199(4) of the Criminal Code of Canada, lawyers need to take swift and strategic action to mitigate the implications of the mandate on their clients. By being proactive, documenting necessary information, and exploring alternative storage arrangements, legal teams can safeguard their clients' interests while maintaining a compliant stance to the law. Moreover, strategies that prioritise communication with legal authorities and the negotiation of waivers or restraining orders can further reinforce their positions.