Criminal Code of Canada - section 187(1.2) - Opening for further applications

section 187(1.2)

INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION

The contents of a sealed packet can be opened for the purpose of authorizing or renewing an authorization.

SECTION WORDING

187(1.2) The sealed packet may be opened and its contents removed for the purpose of dealing with an application for a further authorization or with an application for renewal of an authorization.

EXPLANATION

Section 187(1.2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the circumstances under which a sealed packet may be opened and its contents removed. In this context, a sealed packet typically refers to information that has been obtained through investigative measures such as wiretapping or surveillance. The opening of a sealed packet is typically requested as part of an application for further authorization or renewal of an existing authorization. This means that law enforcement agencies may need to access the information contained within the packet in order to continue their investigation or surveillance. The Criminal Code of Canada provides strict guidelines around the use of investigative tools such as wiretapping and surveillance. These tools are only to be used in situations where there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and where all other investigative options have been exhausted. In addition, the Code requires that the information obtained through these measures be tightly controlled and protected. The use of sealed packets, which can only be accessed under specific conditions, is one method of ensuring that this information is not misused or mishandled. Overall, Section 187(1.2) of the Criminal Code of Canada plays an important role in regulating the use of investigative tools by law enforcement agencies, and in protecting the privacy rights of individuals who may be the subject of these investigations.

COMMENTARY

Section 187(1.2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important and controversial provision that allows for the opening of a sealed packet and the removal of its contents in certain circumstances. This provision is related to the authorization of interception of communications under the Criminal Code, which is a powerful investigative tool that allows law enforcement agencies to intercept private communications between individuals. The interception of communications is not a new concept, and it has been used in investigations of serious crimes such as drug trafficking, terrorism, and organized crime. However, this investigative technique is also subject to strict legal and procedural requirements that are designed to protect the privacy rights of citizens and prevent abuses by law enforcement agencies. Section 187(1.2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides for the opening of a sealed packet and the removal of its contents in two specific circumstances: when dealing with an application for a further authorization or with an application for renewal of an authorization. This provision is important because it allows the reviewing judge to have access to the contents of intercepted communications when considering an application for further interception or renewal of an interception authorization. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that the reviewing judge has the necessary information to make an informed decision about whether to grant the further interception or renewal authorization. This provision also allows the judge to assess the necessity and proportionality of the interception, as well as the compliance of the law enforcement agencies with the legal and procedural requirements for interception. However, the provision has been criticized by some who argue that it undermines the privacy rights of individuals and allows for uncontrolled access to intercepted communications. There are concerns that the provision could be used to circumvent the legal and procedural requirements for interception, and that it could be abused by law enforcement agencies for purposes that are not related to the investigation of serious crimes. Despite these concerns, the provision has been upheld by Canadian courts as constitutional and consistent with the principles of fundamental justice. In a landmark decision in 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada reaffirmed the importance of the intercepting communications provisions in the Criminal Code while also emphasizing that these provisions must be interpreted in a manner that respects the Charter rights of individuals. In conclusion, section 187(1.2) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that balances the need for investigative tools with the protection of privacy rights. While it has been criticized by some, it has been upheld by the courts as constitutional and necessary for the investigation of serious crimes. The provision must be applied in a manner that respects the legal and procedural requirements for interception and the Charter rights of individuals.

STRATEGY

Section 187(1.2) of the Criminal Code of Canada allows for the opening of a sealed packet that contains information obtained through the use of a wiretap or other electronic communication interception device. This can be done in order to deal with applications for further authorization or renewal of authorization. As such, there are a number of strategic considerations that must be taken into account when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code. One of the primary considerations is the potential impact on privacy and civil liberties. The use of wiretaps and other electronic surveillance techniques can be highly invasive, and the contents of the sealed packet may contain sensitive information about individuals who have not been charged with any crime. As such, any decision to open the packet and examine its contents must carefully balance the potential benefits of doing so against the potential harm to individual rights and freedoms. Another important consideration is the need to comply with procedural requirements and legal standards. The use of wiretaps and electronic surveillance techniques is subject to strict legal requirements, including the need to obtain authorization from a judge or other judicial officer. As such, any application to open a sealed packet must be justified and supported by evidence that meets the legal threshold for authorization. In addition to these considerations, there are a number of strategies that can be employed when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code. For example, it may be possible to challenge the legality of the wiretap or surveillance operation in question, which could raise questions about the admissibility of the information contained in the sealed packet. Similarly, it may be possible to argue that the information in the packet is not relevant or necessary to the further investigation or prosecution of a crime. Another strategic approach may be to negotiate with prosecutors or law enforcement officials in order to reach an agreement that allows for the information to be used in a limited capacity, such as in plea negotiations or sentencing hearings. This can help to minimize the potential negative impact on individual rights and freedoms, while still allowing for the prosecution of criminal activity. Ultimately, the most effective strategy will depend on the specific circumstances of each case, including the nature of the information contained in the sealed packet, the legal requirements that must be met in order to open it, and the potential impact on individual rights and freedoms. As such, it is important to consult with legal counsel and other experts in order to develop an effective strategy that is tailored to the specific needs of each case.