INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
83.06(2) The information shall be returned to counsel representing the Minister and shall not be considered by the judge in making the determination under paragraph 83.05(6)(d), if (a) the judge determines that the information is not relevant; (b) the judge determines that the information is relevant but should be summarized in the statement to be provided under paragraph 83.05(6)(b); or (c) the Minister withdraws the application.
Section 83.06(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the procedure for handling information that is submitted by the Minister in an application for a peace bond under section 810.01 of the Criminal Code. According to this provision, the information that is submitted by the Minister must be returned to their counsel and not considered by the judge if certain conditions are met. Firstly, if the judge determines that the information is not relevant to the case, then it should not be considered. Secondly, if the judge determines that the information is relevant but should be summarized in the statement to be provided by the Minister, then it also be returned. Finally, if the Minister withdraws the application, then the information should be returned. This provision ensures that only relevant and necessary information is taken into account when making a determination under paragraph 83.05(6)(d) of the Criminal Code. It also protects individuals from having their personal information potentially used against them in an inappropriate or unnecessary manner. Overall, section 83.06(2) serves to uphold the principles of fairness and justice in the Canadian legal system by ensuring that only relevant information is considered in the determination of a peace bond application.
Section 83.06(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada deals with the handling of information in relation to a peace bond application made under section 810.01 of the Code. Such applications are made by the Minister of Justice or their representative, seeking a court order requiring a person to enter into a peace bond in order to prevent the commission of a serious personal injury offence, a terrorism offence, or criminal harassment. One of the key requirements for making a peace bond application is the provision of information to the court. This information must be written and sworn to by the applicant or their representative, and must include details of the behaviour that led to the application being made. However, in some cases, the information provided may contain details that are not relevant to the determination of whether a peace bond should be granted. Section 83.06(2) provides guidelines for the handling of such irrelevant information. Specifically, the judge is instructed to return the information to counsel representing the Minister if they determine that it is not relevant. This means that the information will not be considered by the judge in making their decision about whether to grant the peace bond. In addition to provisions for dealing with irrelevant information, section 83.06(2) also provides for situations where the information provided is deemed to be relevant. In such cases, the judge may determine that the information should be summarized in the statement to be provided under paragraph 83.05(6)(b). It is worth noting that the purpose of this section of the Code is to ensure that the court is presented with information that is both relevant and necessary for making a determination about whether a peace bond should be granted. By providing guidelines for handling irrelevant information, section 83.06(2) helps to prevent the court from being overloaded with unnecessary data that could distract from the key issues at hand. Finally, the Minister is also given the option to withdraw the application in situations where the information provided is not suitable for use in court. This provides a further safeguard against the inappropriate use of information in the peace bond application process, as the Minister may choose to withdraw the application rather than presenting irrelevant or unreliable information to the court. In conclusion, section 83.06(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides important guidance for the handling of information in peace bond applications. By ensuring that only relevant and necessary information is presented to the court, this section helps to ensure that the decision-making process is fair and just for all involved.
Section 83.06(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the rules governing the use of information in the context of a terrorist entity listing. This provision stipulates that the information submitted by the Minister of Public Safety in support of a listing application should be carefully scrutinized by the presiding judge, who will determine whether the evidence is relevant, summarized or returned. One of the key strategic considerations when dealing with this section of the Criminal Code is the need to carefully assess the relevance of the information presented by the Minister. Given the highly sensitive nature of national security and terrorism-related matters, the Minister may be inclined to submit a large amount of information that appears relevant but may not actually be admissible or helpful in establishing the existence of a terrorist entity. To address this challenge, counsel representing the individual or entity under consideration for listing should carefully review the information provided by the Minister and seek to identify any potential weaknesses or inconsistencies in the evidence. This may involve consulting with expert witnesses, conducting independent research, and challenging the Crown's assertions if necessary. Another key strategic consideration is the need to ensure that any information deemed irrelevant by the judge is returned to the Minister and not considered in the determination process. This may involve advocating for the exclusion of certain evidence or challenging the relevancy of information presented by the Crown. Effective legal arguments may require extensive research and preparation to fully understand the nuances of the Criminal Code provisions and relevant case law. In some cases, it may be appropriate to seek clarification or guidance from the judge with respect to the interpretation or application of Section 83.06(2). This may involve requesting additional time or resources to prepare a more robust defense or presenting arguments that challenge the relevance or admissibility of the Minister's evidence. Ultimately, the key strategic considerations when dealing with Section 83.06(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada are to: carefully review and challenge the admissibility of evidence presented by the Crown, ensure that any information deemed irrelevant is returned to the Minister, and seek guidance from the presiding judge as needed. By employing these strategies, counsel can help ensure that terrorist entity listings are based on accurate and reliable evidence, and avoid the unjust and unwarranted stigmatization of individuals or entities that do not pose a genuine threat to national security.