section 83.05(6.1)


The judge has the discretion to consider reliable and appropriate evidence, even if it would not be admissible under Canadian law, in making a decision.


83.05(6.1) The judge may receive into evidence anything that, in the opinion of the judge, is reliable and appropriate, even if it would not otherwise be admissible under Canadian law, and may base his or her decision on that evidence.


Section 83.05(6.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada grants judges the power to admit evidence that would typically be considered inadmissible in a Canadian court of law. This section was introduced to provide the judiciary with greater flexibility in ensuring that justice is served and to prevent the potential for individuals who pose a public safety risk from remaining undeterred by the strict rules of evidence. The language in section 83.05(6.1) is broad, allowing judges to determine what is reliable and appropriate". This means that they can consider any evidence, regardless of how it was obtained, so long as they deem it to be reliable. In practice, this could include information gathered through surveillance, intercepted communications, or even hearsay evidence, which is typically not admissible under regular circumstances. The phrase appropriate" in this context refers to evidence that is relevant to the case, and that would be helpful in reaching a decision. For example, an intercepted conversation between two individuals discussing a planned attack could be admissible under 83.05(6.1) if the judge determines that it is reliable and appropriate. It is worth noting that the admission of evidence under this section is discretionary, not mandatory. This means that a judge may choose to admit or exclude such evidence based on their discretion. Additionally, the power to admit evidence under 83.05(6.1) is subject to the charter protections of the accused, including the right to a fair trial and the right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. Overall, section 83.05(6.1) provides judges with greater flexibility to ensure that justice is served in cases involving terrorist activity. While its application is rare, it is a powerful tool in the fight against terrorism, allowing the judiciary to consider evidence that might not otherwise be considered.


Section 83.05(6.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides judges with the authority to receive into evidence anything that they deem reliable and appropriate, regardless of its admissibility under Canadian law. This provision is a departure from traditional legal rules governing the admissibility of evidence, which generally require that evidence be relevant, material, and obtained in a lawful manner. The purpose of this provision is to enable judges to consider a wider range of evidence in terrorism-related cases where traditional rules of evidence might prevent critical information from being presented in court. It is intended to ensure that judges have access to the best available evidence in order to make informed decisions about the guilt or innocence of accused individuals and the appropriate penalties for those found guilty. However, there are concerns that Section 83.05(6.1) could be used to admit unreliable or prejudicial evidence, and that it could undermine the rules of evidence and the rights of the accused. One concern is that the provision could result in the admission of hearsay evidence, which is generally considered unreliable and not admissible in court. Another concern is that the provision could allow the admission of evidence that was obtained through torture or other forms of coercion, violating the fundamental principle that evidence obtained through unlawful means should not be admissible in court. These concerns highlight the need for careful consideration of the reliability and appropriateness of evidence presented under Section 83.05(6.1). Judges must exercise caution when considering evidence under this provision, taking into account the potential risks and benefits of admitting such evidence. They must also ensure that the rights of the accused are protected, and that any evidence presented is subject to rigorous scrutiny and testing in order to ensure its reliability and accuracy. Overall, Section 83.05(6.1) provides judges with a powerful tool for combating terrorism-related crimes by enabling them to consider a wider range of evidence. However, it must be used judiciously and with due regard for the principles of fairness and justice that underpin Canada's legal system. Judges must balance the need for effective law enforcement with the need for fairness, and ensure that evidence presented under this provision is both reliable and appropriate.


Section 83.05(6.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides a unique opportunity for criminal defense lawyers to introduce evidence that may not be admissible under Canadian law. This gives lawyers greater flexibility in presenting their cases and allows them to seek alternative ways to prove their clients' innocence. However, the section also presents several strategic considerations that must be taken into account. One of the main strategic considerations to keep in mind when dealing with Section 83.05(6.1) is the reliability of the evidence being presented. While the section allows for evidence that may not be admissible under Canadian law, it also stresses the importance of reliability. This means that lawyers must ensure that the evidence they present is both credible and trustworthy. They must be able to prove the source of the evidence, its authenticity, and how it was collected or obtained. This is especially important when introducing evidence that may be controversial or disputed. Another strategic consideration is the relevance of the evidence. Lawyers must be able to show how the evidence is relevant to the case, how it supports their argument, and how it helps to prove their client's innocence. Evidence that is not directly related to the case or that can be easily dismissed may be disregarded by the judge, regardless of its reliability. For lawyers, the introduction of unreliable evidence can be costly. Not only does it put their case in jeopardy, but it can also undermine their credibility in the eyes of the judge. This is why it is crucial to ensure that any evidence presented is reliable and credible. In terms of strategies that can be employed when dealing with Section 83.05(6.1), one approach is to consider alternative types of evidence. This may include documentary evidence, witness statements, or expert testimony. The use of these types of evidence can help to provide a more complete picture of the case, and may even help to establish a defense that was not previously considered. Another strategy is to seek the assistance of a legal expert or specialist who can help assess the reliability and relevance of the evidence being presented. They can provide an objective opinion on the credibility of the evidence, and help to identify any potential problems or issues that may arise. Finally, lawyers must be able to articulate the reasons why they are introducing the evidence, and how it supports their client's defense. This requires careful preparation and strategy, including the ability to anticipate potential challenges or obstacles that may arise. In conclusion, Section 83.05(6.1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides criminal defense lawyers with a unique opportunity to introduce evidence that may not be admissible under Canadian law. While this allows for greater flexibility in presenting their case, it also requires careful considerations and strategic planning to ensure that the evidence presented is reliable, relevant, and persuasive.