Date: 20000609
Docket: T-701-99
BETWEEN:
WILLIAM ROWAT
Applicant
- and -
THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA and
THE DEPUTY INFORMATION COMMISSIONER OF CANADA
Respondents
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
CAMPBELL J.
[1] The Commissioner of Information, Mr. J.M. Reid (the "Commissioner"), acting under the authority of the Access to Information Act R.S.C. 1985, c. A-1 (the "Act") takes the position that he has broad and effective powers to investigate complaints made respecting the application of the Act . In particular, the Commissioner argues that, on the facts of the present case, he had the power to order Mr. Rowat to divulge certain information, and, faced with a refusal to do so, has the power to conduct a show cause hearing for why Mr. Rowat should not be held in contempt. Mr. Rowat fully contests the Commissioner"s jurisdiction to take this action.
A. Background and the present application
[2] A great deal of the factual details concerning this application are protected by a confidentiality order, but the following are in the public domain and sufficient to describe the context in which this important dispute has arisen.
[3] Mr. William Rowat is a Senior Advisor to the Privy Council Office and was Deputy Minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans between May 1994 and August 1997. On 25 August 1997, Mr. Rowat was seconded from the Government of Canada to the Government of Newfoundland as a negotiator for the Voisey"s Bay mining project.
[4] By letter dated 6 October 1998, the Commissioner received complaints against the heads of the Privy Council Office, and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. These complaints made were as a result of a perceived breach of confidentiality arising out of the processing of access to information requests regarding Mr. Rowat"s secondment, and his work-related expense claims between October 1996 and August 1997.
[5] On 16 November 1998, and 8 December 1998 respectively, the Commissioner informed the heads of the government departments concerned of his intention to investigate the complaints pursuant to s.32 of the Act. 1
[6] On 12 February 1999, in applying the powers provided in s.36 of the Act, the Deputy Commissioner, 2 Mr. A. Leadbeater, wrote to Mr. Rowat informing him that he wished to examine him under oath. This action was taken because, during the Deputy Commissioner"s initial investigation, Mr. Rowat refused to provide the name of the person who revealed to him the identity of the party seeking information relating to his role as a public official.
[7] On 17 and 22 March 1999, accompanied by counsel for the Privy Council Office, Mr. Rowat appeared and gave testimony before the Deputy Commissioner.
[8] At the 22 March 1999 hearing, counsel for the Privy Council Office argued that the Deputy Commissioner does not have jurisdiction under the Act to investigate the breach alleged. However, the Deputy Commissioner ruled that he had jurisdiction to do so, and ordered Mr. Rowat to respond to questions regarding his source of information.
[9] As a result of Mr. Rowat"s refusal to answer the questions put to him, the Deputy Commissioner advised Mr. Rowat that he would set a date upon which Mr. Rowat would be required to show cause for why he should not be held in contempt.
[10] On 21 April 1999, Mr. Rowat filed the present application for judicial review, which was amended on 12 April 2000 by Prothonotary Aronovitch, to include a challenge to the constitutionality of s.36(1)(a) of the Act.
[11] By letter dated 28 April 2000, counsel for the Commissioner informed Mr. Rowat through his counsel that, subject to the outcome of the present application, the Commissioner intends to deal with Mr. Rowat"s alleged contempt by appointing former Quebec Superior Court Judge, the Honourable B.J. Greenberg, as the Commissioner"s delegate to conduct the show cause hearing pursuant to the Federal Court Rules . 3
[12] As a result, Mr. Rowat brings the present application to challenge the jurisdiction of the Commissioner, and prohibit the conduct of the show cause hearing. Mr. Rowat also seeks a declaration that s.36(1)(a) of the Act is of no force and effect in that it contravenes s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights and/or ss. 7 and 11(d) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
B. The Commissioner"s jurisdiction under s.30(1)(f) of the Act
[13] Mr. Rowat argues that s.30(1)(f) does not provide jurisdiction to investigate the complaints made and the standard of review of the Commissioner"s decision to proceed, being one of jurisdiction, is correctness. I agree with this submission. 4
[14] Thus, the question becomes whether s.30(1)(f) confers jurisdiction on the Commissioner to investigate the complaints made in the present case. For the following reasons, I find it does.
[15] By s.30(1)(f), the Commissioner "shall receive and investigate complaints ... in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under [the] Act". Thus, by the plain meaning of the words used, the Commissioner"s obligation has wide scope.
[16] Mr. Rowat argues that the scope of the obligation is narrowed by interpreting s.30(1)(f) according to the ejusdem generis rule whereby, when a list of specific words is followed by a general term, it will normally be appropriate to limit the general term to the "genus" of the narrow enumeration that precedes it. 5 That is, since s.30(1)(a) through (e) speak of the Commissioner"s obligation to investigate complaints respecting the release of information by government departments to requesters, s.30(1)(f) is limited to this subject matter.
[17] As the only case example supporting this proposition, Mr. Rowat"s counsel cites Nanaimo (City) v. Rascal Trucking Ltd. [2000] S.C.J. No. 14 where the statutory provision under consideration is s.936 of the Municipal Act, R.S.B.C. 1979, c.290 which reads as follows:
| 936. (1) The council may declare a building, structure or erection of any kind, or a drain, ditch, watercourse, pond, surface water or other matter or thing, in or on private land or a highway, or in or about a building or structure, a nuisance, and may direct and order that it be removed, pulled down, filled up or otherwise dealt with by its owner, agent, lessee or occupier, as the council may determine and within the time after service of the order that may be named in it. [Emphasis added] |
[18] Clearly, there is a significant difference between the precedent advanced and the terms of s.30(1)(f), and, therefore, I find the precedent is not persuasive.
[19] In answer to Mr. Rowat"s argument concerning the application of the ejusdem generis rule, I agree with the Commissioner"s submission that, where clear intention is stated, the rule does not apply. 6 Thus, I find that, given Parliament"s intention is clear from the plain meaning of the words used in s.30(1)(f), the ejusdem generis rule has no application.
[20] Accordingly, I find that the Commissioner has jurisdiction to investigate the complaints in the present case. 7
C. Section 36 of the Act and s.11 of the Charter
[21] Mr. Rowat makes the focussed argument that s.36(1)(a) of the Act offends s.11(d) of the Charter because the Commissioner is neither "independent" nor "impartial". For the reasons which follow, I find that, while s.11 is engaged in the application of s.36(1)(a) by the Commissioner, there is no breach.
1. Engaging s.11 of the Charter
[22] While the Supreme Court of Canada has said that a distinction should be drawn between civil and criminal contempt 8, nevertheless, two emphatic opinions of members of the Court operate as persuasive authority for the proposition that, without distinction, s.11 is engaged with respect to contempt proceedings.
[23] With respect to contempt of a Federal Court order, Sopinka J. in Bhatnager v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) [1990] 2 S.C.R. 217 at 224 states as follows:
| It is well to remember at the outset that an allegation of contempt of court is a matter of criminal (or at least quasi-criminal) dimension: see [1953] 1 S.C.R. 516">Poje v. Attorney General for British Columbia, [1953] 1 S.C.R. 516, per Kellock J., at pp. 517-18; and In re Bramblevale Ltd., [1970] Ch. 128 (C.A.), per Denning at p. 137. In the present case, a finding of guilt could have subjected the appellants to a fine of as much as $5,000 and the possibility of imprisonment to a maximum of one year: see Rule 355(2). It is necessary, therefore, that the constituent elements of contempt be proved against the appellants, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. |
[24] In addition, in Vidéotron Ltée v. Industries Microlec Produits Électroniques Inc. [1992] 2 S.C.R. 1065 which deals with civil contempt under the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure 8, Lamer C.J. at 1071 says this:
| It is clear from reading art. 50 of the Code of Civil Procedure, R.S.Q., c. C-25, that, for all practical purposes, the Quebec legislature has created an offence. The fact that it chose to deal with contempt of court in the Code of Civil Procedure does not in any way alter the fact that, having regard to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, a person cited for contempt of court is a person charged with an offence within the meaning of s.11 of the Charter and enjoys the constitutional guarantee contained in s.11(c), which specifically provides that a person charged with an offence may not be compelled to testify. |
[25] I agree with the above quoted opinions and, thus, find that s.11 of the Charter is engaged by s.36(1)(a) of the Act.
2. Independence and impartiality
[26] The test for each of independence and impartiality is similar, and is that stated by Lamer C.J. in R. v. Généreux [1992] 1 S.C.R. at 286-287 as follows:
| I emphasize that an individual who wishes to challenge the independence of a tribunal for the purposes of s.11(d) needs not prove an actual lack of independence. Instead, the test for this purpose is the same as the test for determining whether a decision-maker is biassed. The question is whether an informed and reasonable person would perceive the tribunal as independent. This approach was justified by this Court in Valente (at p. 689): |
| Although judicial independence is a status or relationship resting on objective conditions or guarantees, as well as a state of mind or attitude in the actual exercise of judicial functions, it is sound, I think, that the test for independence for purposes of s.11(d) of the Charter should be, as for impartiality, whether the tribunal may be reasonably perceived as independent. Both independence and impartiality are fundamental not only to the capacity to do justice in a particular case but also to individual and public confidence in the administration of justice. Without that confidence the system cannot command the respect and acceptance that are essential to its effective operation. It is, therefore, important that a tribunal should be perceived as independent, as well as impartial, and that the test for independence should include that perception. The perception must, however, as I have suggested, be a perception of whether the tribunal enjoys the essential objective conditions or guarantees of judicial independence, and not a perception of how it will in fact act, regardless of whether it enjoys such conditions or guarantees. |
a) The independence of the Commissioner
[27] Respecting the essential objective conditions or guarantees necessary for a public official to be considered independent, Lamer C.J. in Généreux at 285-286 states as follows:
| The first essential condition of judicial independence, as defined in Valente, is security of tenure. This condition, like the other two, can be satisfied in a number of ways. What is essential is that the decision-maker be removable only for cause. In other words, at p. 698, |
| [t]he essence of security of tenure for purposes of s.11(d) is a tenure, whether until an age of retirement, for a fixed term, or for a specific adjudicative task, that is secure against interference by the Executive or other appointing authority in a discretionary or arbitrary manner. |
| Similarly, s.11(d) of the Charter requires that a decision-maker have a basic degree of financial security. The substance of this condition is as follows (at p. 704): |
| The essence of such security is that the right to salary and pension should be established by law and not be subject to arbitrary interference by the Executive in a manner that could affect judicial independence. |
| Within the limits of this requirement, however, the federal and provincial governments must retain the authority to design specific plans of remuneration that are appropriate to different types of tribunals. Consequently, a variety of schemes may equally satisfy the requirement of financial security, provided that the essence of the condition is protected. |
| The third essential condition of judicial independence is institutional independence with respect to matters of administration that relate directly to the exercise of the tribunal"s judicial function. It is unacceptable that an external force be in a position to interfere in matters that are directly and immediately relevant to the adjudicative function, for examples, assignment of judges, sittings of the court and court lists. Although there must of necessity be some institutional relations between the judiciary and the executive, such relations must not interfere with the judiciary"s liberty in adjudicating individual disputes and in upholding the law and values of the Constitution. (See MacKeigan v. Hickman, supra, per McLachlin J.) |
| A tribunal will not satisfy the requirements of s.11(d) of the Charter if it fails to respect these essential condition of judicial independence. Although the conditions are susceptible to flexible application in order to suit the needs of different tribunals, the essence of each condition must be protected in every case. |
[28] With respect to the independence of the Commissioner, no issue is taken with the following observations made in the argument advanced by the Commissioner:
| The Commissioner is a neutral and independent ombudsofficer charged with supervising the administration of the Access to Information Act and government action in relation thereto and is limited to making recommendations to government institutions or to Parliament regarding the disclosure of government information and the administration of the Access to Information Act. |
| [Access to Information Act, s.2(1), 30, 37, 38, 39, 55 and 56] |
| The Commissioner is not empowered to order government institutions to implement his recommendations. His role is that of a fact-finder who makes recommendations to settle disputes or with the aim of bettering the administration of the Act. He ought not to be likened to a binding arbitrator but to a Commissioner appointed under the Inquiries Act. Nor does the Commissioner, in general, make findings of civil or criminal liability. In summary, the Commissioner does not establish the legal rights or entitlements as between any parties. [Access to Information Act, s.37] 9 |
[29] Precisely with respect to compliance by the Commissioner with the three essential conditions of judicial independence stated by Lamer C.J. in Généreux as quoted above, the Act provides as follows:
| The Governor in Council appoints the Commissioner only after approving resolutions have been passed by both the House of Commons and the Senate of Canada. The Commissioner is appointed for a fixed term of seven years during good behaviour and may only be removed from office by the Governor in Council on the joint address of the House of Commons and Senate. The Commissioner is required by law to engage exclusively in the duties of the Office of the Information Commissioner. [Access to Information Act, s.54 & 55(1)] |
| b. Financial independence |
| The salary paid to the Commissioner is fixed by subsection 55(2) of the Access to Information Act and is to be equal to the salary of a judge of the Federal Court. The Commissioner is also entitled to be paid reasonable travel and living expenses incurred in the performance of his duties. [Access to Information Act, s.55(2)] |
| Further, no criminal or civil proceedings lie against the Commissioner or persons acting on his behalf or under his direction for "anything done, reported or said in good faith in the course of the exercise or performance of any power, duty or function of the Commissioner" under the Access to Information Act . |
| [Access to Information Act, s.66] |
| c. Institutional independence of the tribunal with respect to matters of administration bearing directly on the exercise of its judicial function. |
| Finally, the Commissioner has control over the administration of the Office of the Information Commissioner of Canada. The Commissioner may also authorise any person to exercise or perform any of the powers duties or functions of the Commissioner under the Access to Information Act subject to subsection 59(1) of the Act. The Commissioner also has full control over the conduct of his investigations. |
| [Access to Information Act, ss.58 & 59, 34] 10 |
[30] Thus, I find that, in exercising the duties required under the Act, an informed and reasonable person would perceive the Commissioner as independent.
b) Impartiality
[31] Mr. Rowat asserts that, institutionally, and in the conduct of the present case, the Commissioner lacks impartiality. The argument is framed this way:
| "Impartiality" has two components: the "state of mind" of the decision-maker, and the institutional or structural makeup of the tribunal. |
| With respect to the first: |
| ...the appropriate frame of reference is the "state of mind" of the decision-maker. The circumstances of an individual case must be examined to determine whether there is a reasonable apprehension that the decision-maker, perhaps by having a personal interest in the case, will be subjectively biassed in the particular situation. [R . v. Généreux, supra. at 283.] |
| With respect to the second component: |
| If the system is structured in such a way as to create a reasonable apprehension of bias on an institutional level, the requirement of impartiality is not met. |
| The Respondent"s case would fail on both legs of the test if either of them were to try Mr. Rowat for contempt. [The Deputy Commissioner] wants to have Mr. Rowat answer the question. He formulated the question and put it to Mr. Rowat. He has said, on the record, that Mr. Rowat would be in contempt if he did not answer the question. He has a personal interest in the case. An informed person, viewing the matter realistically and practically, would reasonably reach the conclusion that the Respondents could not decide the matter fairly. Similarly, the system whereby one person is at the same time investigator, inquisitor, prosecutor and judge necessarily creates a reasonable apprehension of bias no matter what facts underline any particular case. 11 |
[32] However, in my opinion, there is no evidence whatsoever that the Commissioner has any personal interest in the outcome of the investigation being conducted in the present case. Indeed, apart from holding Mr. Rowat accountable to answer the questions put as an obligation imposed by the Act, there is no evidence that the Commissioner has any institutional interest in a particular answer. In my opinion, all the Commissioner is attempting to do is comply with the mandatory requirements of the Act through the application of s.30(1)(f) and the use of s.36(1)(a). This does not make him partial.
[33] Thus, I find that, in exercising the duties required under the Act, and in particular with respect to the conduct of the present case, an informed and reasonable person would perceive the Commissioner as impartial.
[34] Accordingly, I find that the Commissioner is both independent and impartial.
D. Section 36 of the Act, s.7 of the Charter, and s.2(e) of the Bill of Rights
[35] In the following words, the Commissioner admits that s.7 of the Charter, and s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights are engaged by the use of s.36 of the Act:
| The Commissioner recognises that a hearing into an allegation of civil contempt in facie engages the applicant's right to liberty and security of the person and must be therefore conducted in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice pursuant to s.7 of the Charter and s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights. It is submitted that in the circumstances of this case, s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights adds nothing to the protections afforded to the Applicant by section 7 of the Charter. 12 |
[36] But, the Commissioner argues that no breach of s.7 of the Charter or contravention of s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights has occurred in the present case, and indeed, the following procedural safeguards have been provided to Mr. Rowat: precise notice of the nature of his alleged contempt; a description provided to him of the Commissioner's powers; an opportunity to consider whether he wishes to change his position; an adjournment granted to retain and instruct independent legal counsel; and a full opportunity for his counsel to review the transcripts of the proceedings in which the allegation of contempt arises. 13
[37] In addition, the Commissioner argues that the future event of the show cause proceeding does not raise a breach concern because it will be conducted in accordance with the Federal Court Rules.
[38] I accept these arguments, and, therefore, find that there is no evidence of a breach of s.7 of the Charter or a contravention of s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights.
[39] Indeed, given the procedure intended to be followed by the Honourable B.J. Greenberg in the contemplated show cause proceeding, I find that there are no grounds to prohibit it being conducted..
E. Conclusion
[40] As I have found that:
| a) the Commissioner has jurisdiction to investigate the complaints made in the present case under s.30(1)(f) of the Act, and; |
| b) while s.11 of the Charter is engaged, because the Commissioner is independent and impartial in proceeding under s.36(1)(a) of the Act, s.11(d) of the Charter is not offended, and; |
| c) while s.7 of the Charter is engaged, no breach has occurred, and; |
| d) s.2(e) of the Canadian Bill of Rights has not been contravened; |
in my opinion, there is no impediment to the Honourable B.J. Greenberg conducting the show cause hearing directed.
O R D E R
[41] Accordingly, for the reasons provided, Mr. Rowat"s application is dismissed.
[42] I award costs to the Commissioner.
OTTAWA
| Access to Information Act : |
| Canadian Bill of Rights : |
| Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms : |
| Rules 467 and 468 Page 25 |
| Rules 469, 470, 471, 472 Page 26 |
| Access to Information Act
Purpose
2. (1) The purpose of this Act is to extend the present laws of Canada to provide a right of access to information in records under the control of a government institution in accordance with the principles that government information should be available to the public, that necessary exceptions to the right of access should be limited and specific and that decisions on the disclosure
of government information should be reviewed independently of government.
Complementary procedures
(2) This Act is intended to complement and not replace existing procedures for access to government information and is not intended to limit in any way access to the type of government information that is normally available to the general public.
Receipt and investigation of complaints
30. (1) Subject to this Act, the Information Commissioner shall receive and investigate complaints
(a) from persons who have been refused access to a record requested under this Act or a part thereof;
(b) from persons who have been required to pay an amount under section 11 that they consider unreasonable;
(c) from persons who have requested access to records in respect of which time limits have been extended pursuant to section 9 where they consider the extension unreasonable;
(d) from persons who have not been given access to a record or a part thereof in the official language requested by the person
under subsection 12(2), or have not been given access in that language within a period of time that they consider appropriate;
(d.(1) from persons who have not been given access to a record or a part thereof in an alternative format pursuant to a request made under subsection 12(3), or have not been given such access within a period of time that they consider appropriate;
|
|
| (e) in respect of any publication or bulletin referred to in section 5; or
(f) in respect of any other matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act.
Complaints submitted on behalf of complainants
(2) Nothing in this Act precludes the Information Commissioner from receiving and investigating complaints of a nature described in subsection (1) that are submitted by a person authorized by the complainant to act on behalf of the complainant,
and a reference to a complainant in any other section includes a reference to a person so authorized.
Information Commissioner may initiate complaint
(3) Where the Information Commissioner is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to investigate a matter relating to requesting or obtaining access to records under this Act, the Commissioner may initiate a complaint in respect thereof.
R.S., 1985, c. A-1, s. 30; 1992, c. 21, s. 4.
Notice of intention to investigate
32. Before commencing an investigation of a complaint under this Act, the Information Commissioner shall notify the head of the government institution concerned of the intention to carry out the investigation and shall inform the head of the institution of
the substance of the complaint.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "32".
Regulation of procedure
34. Subject to this Act, the Information Commissioner may determine the procedure to be followed in the performance of any
duty or function of the Commissioner under this Act.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "34".
|
|
| Powers of Information Commissioner in carrying out investigations
36. (1) The Information Commissioner has, in relation to the carrying out of the investigation of any complaint under this Act,
power
(a) to summon and enforce the appearance of persons before the Information Commissioner and compel them to give oral or
written evidence on oath and to produce such documents and things as the Commissioner deems requisite to the full investigation and consideration of the complaint, in the same manner and to the same extent as a superior court of record;
(b) to administer oaths;
(c) to receive and accept such evidence and other information, whether on oath or by affidavit or otherwise, as the Information
Commissioner sees fit, whether or not the evidence or information is or would be admissible in a court of law;
(d) to enter any premises occupied by any government institution on satisfying any security requirements of the institution
relating to the premises;
(e) to converse in private with any person in any premises entered pursuant to paragraph (d) and otherwise carry out therein such inquiries within the authority of the Information Commissioner under this Act as the Commissioner sees fit; and
(f) to examine or obtain copies of or extracts from books or other records found in any premises entered pursuant to paragraph (d) containing any matter relevant to the investigation.
Access to records
(2) Notwithstanding any other Act of Parliament or any privilege under the law of evidence, the Information Commissioner may, during the investigation of any complaint under this Act, examine any record to which this Act applies that is under the control of a government institution, and no such record may be withheld from the Commissioner on any grounds.
Evidence in other proceedings
(3) Except in a prosecution of a person for an offence under section 131 of the Criminal Code (perjury) in respect of a statement made under this Act, in a prosecution for an offence under this Act, or in a review before the Court under this Act or
an appeal therefrom, evidence given by a person in proceedings under this Act and evidence of the existence of the proceedings is inadmissible against that person in a court or in any other proceedings.
Witness fees
(4) Any person summoned to appear before the Information Commissioner pursuant to this section is entitled in the discretion of the Commissioner to receive the like fees and allowances for so doing as if summoned to attend before the Federal Court.
Return of documents, etc.
(5) Any document or thing produced pursuant to this section by any person or government institution shall be returned by the Information Commissioner within ten days after a request is made to the Commissioner by that person or government institution, but nothing in this subsection precludes the Commissioner from again requiring its production in accordance with this
section.
R.S., 1985, c. A-1, s. 36; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 187.
Findings and recommendations of Information Commissioner
37. (1) If, on investigating a complaint in respect of a record under this Act, the Information Commissioner finds that the
complaint is well-founded, the Commissioner shall provide the head of the government institution that has control of the record with a report containing
(a) the findings of the investigation and any recommendations that the Commissioner considers appropriate; and
(b) where appropriate, a request that, within a time specified in the report, notice be given to the Commissioner of any action taken or proposed to be taken to implement the recommendations contained in the report or reasons why no such action has been or is proposed to be taken.
Report to complainant and third parties
(2) The Information Commissioner shall, after investigating a complaint under this Act, report to the complainant and any third
party that was entitled under subsection 35(2) to make and that made representations to the Commissioner in respect of the
complaint the results of the investigation, but where a notice has been requested under paragraph (1)(b) no report shall be made under this subsection until the expiration of the time within which the notice is to be given to the Commissioner.
|
|
| Matter to be included in report to complainant
(3) Where a notice has been requested under paragraph (1)(b) but no such notice is received by the Commissioner within the time specified therefor or the action described in the notice is, in the opinion of the Commissioner, inadequate or inappropriate or will not be taken in a reasonable time, the Commissioner shall so advise the complainant in his report under subsection (2) and may include in the report such comments on the matter as he thinks fit.
Access to be given
(4) Where, pursuant to a request under paragraph (1)(b), the head of a government institution gives notice to the Information Commissioner that access to a record or a part thereof will be given to a complainant, the head of the institution shall give the
complainant access to the record or part thereof
(a) forthwith on giving the notice if no notice is given to a third party under paragraph 29(1)(b) in the matter; or
(b) forthwith on completion of twenty days after notice is given to a third party under paragraph 29(1)(b), if that notice is given, unless a review of the matter is requested under section 44.
Right of review
(5) Where, following the investigation of a complaint relating to a refusal to give access to a record requested under this Act or a part thereof, the head of a government institution does not give notice to the Information Commissioner that access to the record will be given, the Information Commissioner shall inform the complainant that the complainant has the right to apply to the Court for a review of the matter investigated.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "37".
Annual report
38. The Information Commissioner shall, within three months after the termination of each financial year, submit an annual report to Parliament on the activities of the office during that financial year.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "38".
|
|
| Special reports
39. (1) The Information Commissioner may, at any time, make a special report to Parliament referring to and commenting on
any matter within the scope of the powers, duties and functions of the Commissioner where, in the opinion of the Commissioner, the matter is of such urgency or importance that a report thereon should not be deferred until the time provided for transmission of the next annual report of the Commissioner under section 38.
Where investigation made
(2) Any report made pursuant to subsection (1) that relates to an investigation under this Act shall be made only after the procedures set out in section 37 have been followed in respect of the investigation.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "39".
Information Commissioner
54. (1) The Governor in Council shall, by commission under the Great Seal, appoint an Information Commissioner after approval of the appointment by resolution of the Senate and House of Commons.
Tenure of office and removal
(2) Subject to this section, the Information Commissioner holds office during good behaviour for a term of seven years, but may be removed by the Governor in Council at any time on address of the Senate and House of Commons.
Further terms
(3) The Information Commissioner, on the expiration of a first or any subsequent term of office, is eligible to be re-appointed for a further term not exceeding seven years.
Absence or incapacity
(4) In the event of the absence or incapacity of the Information Commissioner, or if the office of Information Commissioner is
vacant, the Governor in Council may appoint another qualified person to hold office instead of the Commissioner for a term not
exceeding six months, and that person shall, while holding that office, have all of the powers, duties and functions of the Information Commissioner under this or any other Act of Parliament and be paid such salary or other remuneration and expenses as may be fixed by the Governor in Council.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "54".
|
|
| Rank, powers and duties generally
55. (1) The Information Commissioner shall rank as and have all the powers of a deputy head of a department, shall engage exclusively in the duties of the office of Information Commissioner under this or any other Act of Parliament and shall not hold any other office under Her Majesty for reward or engage in any other employment for reward.
Salary and expenses
(2) The Information Commissioner shall be paid a salary equal to the salary of a judge of the Federal Court, other than the Chief Justice or the Associate Chief Justice of that Court, and is entitled to be paid reasonable travel and living expenses
incurred in the performance of duties under this or any other Act of Parliament.
Pension benefits
(3) The provisions of the Public Service Superannuation Act, other than those relating to tenure of office, apply to the Information Commissioner, except that a person appointed as Information Commissioner from outside the Public Service, as defined in the Public Service Superannuation Act, may, by notice in writing given to the President of the Treasury Board not
more than sixty days after the date of appointment, elect to participate in the pension plan provided in the Diplomatic Service (Special) Superannuation Act, in which case the provisions of that Act, other than
those relating to tenure of office, apply to the Information Commissioner from the date of appointment and the provisions of the Public Service Superannuation Act do not apply.
Other benefits
(4) The Information Commissioner is deemed to be employed in the public service of Canada for the purposes of the Government Employees Compensation Act and any regulations made under section 9 of the Aeronautics Act.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "55".
Appointment of Assistant Information Commissioner
56. (1) The Governor in Council may, on the recommendation of the Information Commissioner, appoint one or more Assistant Information Commissioners.
Tenure of office and removal of Assistant Information Commissioner
(2) Subject to this section, an Assistant Information Commissioner holds office during good behaviour for a term not exceeding five years.
|
|
| Further terms
(3) An Assistant Information Commissioner, on the expiration of a first or any subsequent term of office, is eligible to be re-appointed for a further term not exceeding five years.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "56".
Staff of the Information Commissioner
58. (1) Such officers and employees as are necessary to enable the Information Commissioner to perform the duties and functions of the Commissioner under this or any other Act of Parliament shall be appointed in accordance with the Public Service Employment Act.
Technical assistance
(2) The Information Commissioner may engage on a temporary basis the services of persons having technical or specialized knowledge of any matter relating to the work of the Commissioner to advise and assist the Commissioner in the performance of the duties and functions of the Commissioner under this or any other Act of Parliament and, with the approval of the Treasury Board, may fix and pay the remuneration and expenses of those persons.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "58".
Delegation by Information Commissioner
59. (1) Subject to subsection (2), the Information Commissioner may authorize any person to exercise or perform, subject to such restrictions or limitations as the Commissioner may specify, any of the powers, duties or functions of the Commissioner under this or any other Act of Parliament except
(a) in any case other than a delegation to an Assistant Information Commissioner, the power to delegate under this section;
and
(b) in any case, the powers, duties or functions set out in sections 38 and 39.
Delegations of investigations relating to international affairs and defence
(2) The Information Commissioner may not, nor may an Assistant Information Commissioner, delegate the investigation of any complaint resulting from a refusal by the head of a government institution to disclose a record or a part of a record by reason of paragraph 13(1)(a) or (b) or section 15 except to one of a maximum of four officers or employees of the Commissioner
specifically designated by the Commissioner for the purpose of conducting those investigations.
Delegation by Assistant Information Commissioner
(3) An Assistant Information Commissioner may authorize any person to exercise or perform, subject to such restrictions or limitations as the Assistant Information Commissioner may specify, any of the powers, duties or functions of the Information Commissioner under this or any other Act of Parliament that the Assistant Information Commissioner is authorized by the
Information Commissioner to exercise or perform.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "59".
Protection of Information Commissioner
66. (1) No criminal or civil proceedings lie against the Information Commissioner, or against any person acting on behalf or under the direction of the Commissioner, for anything done, reported or said in good faith in the course of the exercise or performance or purported exercise or performance of any power, duty or function of the Commissioner under this Act.
(2) For the purposes of any law relating to libel or slander,
(a) anything said, any information supplied or any document or thing produced in good faith in the course of an investigation by or on behalf of the Information Commissioner under this Act is privileged; and
(b) any report made in good faith by the Information Commissioner under this Act and any fair and accurate account of the report made in good faith in a newspaper or any other periodical publication or in a broadcast is privileged.
1980-81-82-83, c. 111, Sch. I "66".
|
|
| Accès à l'information, Loi sur l'
Objet
2. (1) La présente loi a pour objet d'élargir l'accès aux documents de l'administration fédérale en consacrant le principe du droit
du public à leur communication, les exceptions indispensables à ce droit étant précises et limitées et les décisions quant à la communication étant susceptibles de recours indépendants du pouvoir exécutif.
Étoffement des modalités d'accès
(2) La présente loi vise à compléter les modalités d'accès aux documents de l'administration fédérale; elle ne vise pas à restreindre l'accès aux renseignements que les institutions fédérales mettent normalement à la disposition du grand public.
Réception des plaintes et enquêtes
30. (1) Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente loi, le Commissaire à l'information reçoit les plaintes et fait enquête
sur les plaintes :
a) déposées par des personnes qui se sont vu refuser la communication totale ou partielle d'un document qu'elles ont demandé
en vertu de la présente loi;
b) déposées par des personnes qui considèrent comme excessif le montant réclamé en vertu de l'article 11;
c) déposées par des personnes qui ont demandé des documents dont les délais de communication ont été prorogés en vertu de l'article 9 et qui considèrent la prorogation comme abusive;
d) déposées par des personnes qui se sont vu refuser la traduction visée au paragraphe 12(2) ou qui considèrent comme contre-indiqué le délai de communication relatif à la traduction;
d.1) déposées par des personnes qui se sont vu refuser la communication des documents ou des parties en cause sur un support de substitution au titre du paragraphe 12(3) ou qui considèrent comme contre-indiqué le délai de communication relatif
au transfert;
|
|
| e) portant sur le répertoire ou le bulletin visés à l'article 5;
f) portant sur toute autre question relative à la demande ou à l'obtention de documents en vertu de la présente loi.
Entremise de représentants
(2) Le Commissaire à l'information peut recevoir les plaintes visées au paragraphe (1) par l'intermédiaire d'un représentant du plaignant. Dans les autres articles de la présente loi, les dispositions qui concernent le plaignant concernent également son
représentant.
Plaintes émanant du Commissaire à l'information
(3) Le Commissaire à l'information peut lui-même prendre l'initiative d'une plainte s'il a des motifs raisonnables de croire qu'une
enquête devrait être menée sur une question relative à la demande ou à l'obtention de documents en vertu de la présente loi.
L.R. (1985), ch. A-1, art. 30; 1992, ch. 21, art. 4.
Avis d'enquête
32. Le Commissaire à l'information, avant de procéder aux enquêtes prévues par la présente loi, avise le responsable de l'institution fédérale concernée de son intention d'enquêter et lui fait connaître l'objet de la plainte.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "32".
Procédure
34. Sous réserve des autres dispositions de la présente loi, le Commissaire à l'information peut établir la procédure à suivre
dans l'exercice de ses pouvoirs et fonctions.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "34".
|
|
| Pouvoirs du Commissaire à l'information pour la tenue des enquêtes
36. (1) Le Commissaire à l'information a, pour l'instruction des plaintes déposées en vertu de la présente loi, le pouvoir :
a) d'assigner et de contraindre des témoins à comparaître devant lui, à déposer verbalement ou par écrit sous la foi du serment et à produire les pièces qu'il juge indispensables pour instruire et examiner à fond les plaintes dont il est saisi, de la même façon et dans la même mesure qu'une cour supérieure d'archives;
b) de faire prêter serment;
c) de recevoir des éléments de preuve ou des renseignements par déclaration verbale ou écrite sous serment ou par tout autre
moyen qu'il estime indiqué, indépendamment de leur admissibilité devant les tribunaux;
d) de pénétrer dans les locaux occupés par une institution fédérale, à condition de satisfaire aux normes de sécurité établies par
l'institution pour ces locaux;
e) de s'entretenir en privé avec toute personne se trouvant dans les locaux visés à l'alinéa d) et d'y mener, dans le cadre de la compétence que lui confère la présente loi, les enquêtes qu'il estime nécessaires;
f) d'examiner ou de se faire remettre des copies ou des extraits des livres ou autres documents contenant des éléments utiles à l'enquête et trouvés dans les locaux visés à l'alinéa d).
Accès aux documents
(2) Nonobstant toute autre loi fédérale et toute immunité reconnue par le droit de la preuve, le Commissaire à l'information a,
pour les enquêtes qu'il mène en vertu de la présente loi, accès à tous les documents qui relèvent d'une institution fédérale et auxquels la présente loi s'applique; aucun de ces documents ne peut, pour quelque motif que ce soit, lui être refusé.
Inadmissibilité de la preuve dans d'autres procédures
(3) Sauf les cas où une personne est poursuivie soit pour une infraction à l'article 131 du Code criminel (parjure) se rapportant à une déclaration faite en vertu de la présente loi, soit pour infraction à la présente loi, ou sauf les cas de recours en révision prévus par la présente loi devant la Cour ou les cas d'appel de la décision rendue par la Cour, les dépositions faites au cours de procédures prévues par la présente loi ou le fait de l'existence de ces procédures ne sont pas admissibles contre le déposant devant les tribunaux ni dans aucune autre procédure.
Frais des témoins
(4) Les témoins assignés à comparaître devant le Commissaire à l'information en vertu du présent article peuvent recevoir, si le
Commissaire le juge indiqué, les frais et indemnités accordés aux témoins assignés devant la Cour fédérale.
Renvoi des documents, etc.
(5) Les personnes ou les institutions fédérales qui produisent des pièces demandées en vertu du présent article peuvent exiger du Commissaire à l'information qu'il leur renvoie ces pièces dans les dix jours suivant la requête qu'elles lui présentent à cette fin, mais rien n'empêche le Commissaire d'en réclamer une nouvelle production.
L.R. (1985), ch. A-1, art. 36; L.R. (1985), ch. 27 (1er suppl.), art. 187.
Conclusions et recommandations du Commissaire à l'information
37. (1) Dans les cas où il conclut au bien-fondé d'une plainte portant sur un document, le Commissaire à l'information adresse au responsable de l'institution fédérale de qui relève le document un rapport où :
a) il présente les conclusions de son enquête ainsi que les recommandations qu'il juge indiquées;
b) il demande, s'il le juge à propos, au responsable de lui donner avis, dans un délai déterminé, soit des mesures prises ou envisagées pour la mise en oeuvre de ses recommandations, soit des motifs invoqués pour ne pas y donner suite.
Compte rendu au plaignant
(2) Le Commissaire à l'information rend compte des conclusions de son enquête au plaignant et aux tiers qui pouvaient, en vertu du paragraphe 35(2), lui présenter des observations et qui les ont présentées; toutefois, dans les cas prévus à l'alinéa
(1)b), le Commissaire à l'information ne peut faire son compte rendu qu'après l'expiration du délai imparti au responsable de l'institution fédérale.
|
|
| Éléments à inclure dans le compte rendu
(3) Le Commissaire à l'information mentionne également dans son compte rendu au plaignant, s'il y a lieu, le fait que, dans les cas prévus à l'alinéa (1)b), il n'a pas reçu d'avis dans le délai imparti ou que les mesures indiquées dans l'avis sont, selon lui, insuffisantes, inadaptées ou non susceptibles d'être prises en temps utile. Il peut en outre y inclure tous commentaires qu'il estime utiles.
Communication accordée
(4) Dans les cas où il fait suite à la demande formulée par le Commissaire à l'information en vertu de l'alinéa (1)b) en avisant le
Commissaire qu'il donnera communication totale ou partielle d'un document, le responsable d'une institution fédérale est tenu de
donner cette communication au plaignant :
a) immédiatement, dans les cas où il n'y a pas de tiers à qui donner l'avis prévu à l'alinéa 29(1)b);
b) dès l'expiration des vingt jours suivant l'avis prévu à l'alinéa 29(1)b), dans les autres cas, sauf si un recours en révision a été exercé en vertu de l'article 44.
Recours en révision
(5) Dans les cas où, l'enquête terminée, le responsable de l'institution fédérale concernée n'avise pas le Commissaire à
l'information que communication du document ou de la partie en cause sera donnée au plaignant, le Commissaire à l'information
informe celui-ci de l'existence d'un droit de recours en révision devant la Cour.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "37".
Rapport annuel
38. Dans les trois mois suivant la fin de chaque exercice, le Commissaire à l'information présente au Parlement le rapport des activités du commissariat au cours de l'exercice.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "38".
|
|
| Rapports spéciaux
39. (1) Le Commissaire à l'information peut, à toute époque de l'année, présenter au Parlement un rapport spécial sur toute question relevant de ses pouvoirs et fonctions et dont l'urgence ou l'importance sont telles, selon lui, qu'il serait contre-indiqué d'en différer le compte rendu jusqu'à l'époque du rapport annuel suivant.
Cas des enquêtes
(2) Le Commissaire à l'information ne peut présenter de rapport spécial sur des enquêtes qu'après observation des formalités prévues à leur sujet à l'article 37.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "39".
Commissaire à l'information
54. (1) Le gouverneur en conseil nomme le Commissaire à l'information par commission sous le grand sceau, après approbation par résolution du Sénat et de la Chambre des communes.
Durée du mandat et révocation
(2) Sous réserve des autres dispositions du présent article, le Commissaire à l'information occupe sa charge à titre inamovible pour un mandat de sept ans, sauf révocation par le gouverneur en conseil sur adresse du Sénat et de la Chambre des communes.
Renouvellement du mandat
(3) Le mandat du Commissaire à l'information est renouvelable pour des périodes maximales de sept ans chacune.
Absence ou empêchement
(4) En cas d'absence ou d'empêchement du Commissaire à l'information ou de vacance de son poste, le gouverneur en conseil
peut confier à toute personne compétente, pour un mandat maximal de six mois, les pouvoirs et fonctions conférés au titulaire du poste par la présente loi ou une autre loi fédérale et fixer la rémunération et les frais auxquels cette personne aura droit.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "54".
|
|
| Rang, pouvoirs et fonctions
55. (1) Le Commissaire à l'information a rang et pouvoirs d'administrateur général de ministère; il se consacre exclusivement à
la charge que lui confère la présente loi ou une autre loi fédérale, à l'exclusion de toute autre charge rétribuée au service de Sa Majesté ou de tout autre emploi rétribué.
Traitement et frais
(2) Le Commissaire à l'information reçoit le même traitement qu'un juge de la Cour fédérale autre que le juge en chef ou que le juge en chef adjoint; il a droit aux frais de déplacement et de séjour entraînés par l'exercice des fonctions que lui confèrent la présente loi ou une autre loi fédérale.
Régime de pension
(3) Les dispositions de la Loi sur la pension de la fonction publique qui ne traitent pas d'occupation de poste s'appliquent au Commissaire à l'information; toutefois, s'il est choisi en dehors de la fonction publique, au sens de la loi mentionnée ci-dessus, il
peut, par avis adressé au président du Conseil du Trésor dans les soixante jours suivant sa date de nomination, choisir de cotiser au régime de pension prévu par la Loi sur la pension spéciale du service diplomatique; dans ce cas, il est assujetti aux dispositions de cette loi qui ne traitent pas d'occupation de poste.
Autres avantages
(4) Le Commissaire à l'information est réputé faire partie de l'administration publique fédérale pour l'application de la Loi sur
l'indemnisation des agents de l'État et des règlements pris en vertu de l'article 9 de la Loi sur l'aéronautique.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "55".
Commissaires adjoints à l'information Nomination
56. (1) Le gouverneur en conseil peut, sur recommandation du Commissaire à l'information, nommer un ou plusieurs
commissaires adjoints à l"information.
Durée du mandat
(2) Sous réserve des autres dispositions du présent article, l'adjoint occupe son poste à titre inamovible pour un mandat
maximal de cinq ans.
|
|
| Renouvellement du mandat
(3) Le mandat de l'adjoint est renouvelable pour des périodes maximales de cinq ans chacune.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "56".
Personnel
58. (1) La Loi sur l'emploi dans la fonction publique s'applique au personnel dont le Commissaire à l'information a besoin pour l'exercice des pouvoirs et fonctions que lui confèrent la présente loi ou une autre loi fédérale.
Assistance technique
(2) Le Commissaire à l'information peut retenir temporairement les services d'experts ou de spécialistes dont la compétence lui est utile dans l'exercice des fonctions que lui confèrent la présente loi ou une autre loi fédérale; il peut fixer, avec l'approbation du Conseil du Trésor, leur rémunération et leurs frais.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "58".
Pouvoir de délégation
59. (1) Sous réserve du paragraphe (2), le Commissaire à l'information peut, dans les limites qu'il fixe, déléguer les pouvoirs et fonctions que lui confèrent la présente loi ou une autre loi fédérale, sauf :
a) le pouvoir même de délégation, qui ne peut être délégué qu'à un commissaire adjoint;
b) les pouvoirs et fonctions énoncés aux articles 38 et 39, qui ne peuvent être délégués à quiconque.
Affaires internationales et défense
(2) Le Commissaire à l'information ou un commissaire adjoint ne peuvent déléguer la tenue des enquêtes portant sur les cas où
le refus de communication totale ou partielle d'un document se fonde sur les alinéas 13(1)a) ou b) ou l'article 15 qu'à un de leurs collaborateurs pris parmi quatre des cadres ou employés du commissariat et que le Commissaire désigne spécialement à
cette fin.
Pouvoir de subdélégation de l'adjoint
(3) Un commissaire adjoint à l'information peut, dans les limites qu'il fixe, subdéléguer les pouvoirs et fonctions que lui délègue le Commissaire en vertu de la présente loi ou d'une autre loi fédérale.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "59";
Immunité du Commissaire à l'information
66. (1) Le Commissaire à l'information et les personnes qui agissent en son nom ou sous son autorité bénéficient de l'immunité
en matière civile ou pénale pour les actes accomplis, les rapports ou comptes rendus établis et les paroles prononcées de bonne foi dans l'exercice effectif ou censé tel des pouvoirs et fonctions qui lui sont conférés en vertu de la présente loi.
(2) Ne peuvent donner lieu à poursuites pour diffamation verbale ou écrite :
a) les paroles prononcées, les renseignements fournis ou les pièces produites de bonne foi au cours d'une enquête menée par le Commissaire à l'information ou en son nom dans le cadre de la présente loi;
b) les rapports ou comptes rendus établis de bonne foi par le Commissaire à l'information dans le cadre de la présente loi, ainsi que les relations qui en sont faites de bonne foi par la presse écrite ou audio-visuelle.
1980-81-82-83, ch. 111, ann. I "66".
|
|
Section 2 of the Canadian Bill of Rights reads as follows:
| Construction of law
2. Every law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by an Act of the Parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the Canadian Bill of Rights, be so construed and applied as not to abrogate, abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgment or infringement of any of the rights or freedoms herein recognized and declared, and in particular, no law of Canada shall be construed or applied so as to
(a) authorize or effect the arbitrary detention, imprisonment or exile of any person;
(b) impose or authorize the imposition of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment;
(c) deprive a person who has been arrested or detained
| (i) of the right to be informed promptly of the reason for his arrest or detention, |
| (ii) of the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay, or |
| (iii) of the remedy by way of habeas corpus for the determination of the validity of his detention and for his release if the detention is not lawful; |
(d) authorize a court, tribunal, commission, board or other authority to compel a person to give evidence if he is denied counsel, protection against self crimination or other constitutional safeguards;
(e) deprive a person of the right to a fair hearing in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice for the determination of his rights and obligations;
(f) deprive a person charged with a criminal offence of the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, or of the right to reasonable bail without just cause; or
(g) deprive a person of the right to the assistance of an interpreter in any proceedings in which he is involved or in which he is a party or a witness, before a court, commission, board or other tribunal, if he does not understand or speak the language in which such proceedings are conducted.
|
|
| Interprétation de la législation
2. Toute loi du Canada, à moins qu'une loi du Parlement du Canada ne déclare expressément qu'elle s'appliquera nonobstant la Déclaration canadienne des droits, doit s'interpréter et s'appliquer de manière à ne pas supprimer, restreindre ou enfreindre l'un quelconque des droits ou des libertés reconnus et déclarés aux présentes, ni à en autoriser la suppression, la diminution ou la transgression, et en particulier, nulle loi du Canada ne doit s'interpréter ni s'appliquer comme
a) autorisant ou prononçant la détention, l'emprisonnement ou l'exil arbitraires de qui que ce soit;
b) infligeant des peines ou traitements cruels et inusités, ou comme en autorisant l'imposition;
c) privant une personne arrêtée ou détenue
| (i) du droit d'être promptement informée des motifs de son arrestation ou de sa détention, |
| (ii) du droit de retenir et constituer un avocat sans délai, ou |
| (iii) du recours par voie d'habeas corpus pour qu'il soit jugé de la validité de sa détention et que sa libération soit ordonnée si la détention n'est pas légale; |
d) autorisant une cour, un tribunal, une commission, un office, un conseil ou une autre autorité à contraindre une personne à témoigner si on lui refuse le secours d'un avocat, la protection contre son propre témoignage ou l'exercice de toute garantie d'ordre constitutionnel;
e) privant une personne du droit à une audition impartiale de sa cause, selon les principes de justice fondamentale, pour la définition de ses droits et obligations;
f) privant une personne accusée d'un acte criminel du droit à la présomption d'innocence jusqu'à ce que la preuve de sa culpabilité ait été établie en conformité de la loi, après une audition impartiale et publique de sa cause par un tribunal indépendant et non préjugé, ou la privant sans juste cause du droit à un cautionnement raisonnable; ou
g) privant une personne du droit à l'assistance d'un interprète dans des procédures où elle est mise en cause ou est partie ou témoin, devant une cour, une commission, un office, un conseil ou autre tribunal, si elle ne comprend ou ne parle pas la langue dans laquelle se déroulent ces procédures.
|
|
Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms reads as follows:
| Life, liberty and security of person
7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
|
Vie, liberté et sécurité
7. Chacun a droit à la vie, à la liberté et à la sécurité de sa personne; il ne peut être porté atteinte à droit qu'en conformité avec les principes de justice fondamentale.
|
Section 11 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms reads as follows:
| Proceedings in criminal and penal matters
11. Any person charged with an offence has the right
a) to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence;
b) to be tried within a reasonable time;
c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;
d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal;
e) not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause;
f) except in the case of an offence under military law tried before a military tribunal, to the benefit of trial by jury where the maximum punishment for the offence is imprisonment for five years or a more severe punishment;
g) not to be found guilty on account of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted an offence under Canadian or international law or was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations;
h) if finally acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again and, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again; and
i) if found guilty of the offence and if the punishment for the offence has been varied between the time of commission and the time of sentencing, to the benefit of the lesser punishment.
|
|
| Affaires criminelles et pénales
11. Tout inculpé a le droit :
a) d'être informé sans délai anormal de l'infraction précise qu'on lui reproche;
b) d'être jugé dans un délai raisonnable;
c) de ne pas être contraint de témoigner contre lui-même dans toute poursuite intentée contre lui pour l'infraction qu'on lui reproche;
d) d'être présumé innocent tant qu'il n'est pas déclaré coupable, conformément à la loi, par un tribunal indépendant et impartial à l'issue d'un procès public et équitable;
e) de ne pas être privé sans juste cause d'une mise en liberté assortie d'un cautionnement raisonnable;
f) sauf s'il s'agit d'une infraction relevant de la justice militaire, de bénéficier d'un procès avec jury lorsque la peine maximale prévue pour l'infraction dont il est accusé est un emprisonnement de cinq ans ou une peine plus grave;
g) de ne pas être déclaré coupable en raison d'une action ou d'une omission qui, au moment où elle est survenue, ne constituait pas une infraction d'après le droit interne du Canada ou le droit international et n'avait pas de caractère criminel d'après les principes généraux de droit reconnus par l'ensemble des nations;
h) d'une part de ne pas être jugé de nouveau pour une infraction dont il a été définitivement acquitté, d'autre part de ne pas être jugé ni puni de nouveau pour une infraction dont il a été définitivement déclaré coupable et puni;
i) de bénéficier de la peine la moins sévère, lorsque la peine qui sanctionne l'infraction dont il est déclaré coupable est modifiée entre le moment de la perpétration de l'infraction et celui de la sentence.
|
|
Federal Court Rules :
| 466. Subject to rule 467, a person is guilty of contempt of Court who
(a) at a hearing fails to maintain a respectful attitude, remain silent or refrain from showing approval or disapproval of the proceeding;
(b) disobeys a process or order of the Court;
(c) acts in such a way as to interfere with the orderly administration of justice, or to impair the authority or dignity of the Court;
(d) is an officer of the Court and fails to perform his or her duty; or
(e) is a sheriff or bailiff and does not execute a writ forthwith or does not make a return thereof or, in executing it, infringes a rule the contravention of which renders the sheriff or bailiff liable to a penalty.
467. (1) Subject to rule 468, before a person may be found in contempt of Court, the person alleged to be in contempt shall be served with an order, made on the motion of a person who has an interest in the proceeding or at the Court's own initiative, requiring the person alleged to be in contempt
(a) to appear before a judge at a time and place stipulated in the order;
(b) to be prepared to hear proof of the act with which the person is charged, which shall be described in the order with sufficient particularity to enable the person to know the nature of the case against the person; and
(c) to be prepared to present any defence that the person may have.
(2) A motion for an order under subsection (1) may be made ex parte
(3) An order may be made under subsection (1) if the Court is satisfied that there is a prima facie case that contempt has been committed.
(4) An order under subsection (1) shall be personally served, together with any supporting documents, unless otherwise ordered by the Court.
468. In a case of urgency, a person may be found in contempt of Court for an act committed in the presence of a judge and condemned at once, if the person has been called on to justify his or her behaviour.
|
|
| 469. A finding of contempt shall be based on proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
470. (1) Unless the Court directs otherwise, evidence on a motion for a contempt order, other than an order under subsection 467(1), shall be oral.
(2) A person alleged to be in contempt may not be compelled to testify.
471. Where the Court considers it necessary, it may request the assistance of the Attorney General of Canada in relation to any proceedings for contempt.
472. Where a person is found to be in contempt, a judge may order that
(a) the person be imprisoned for a period of less than five years or until the person complies with the order;
(b) the person be imprisoned for a period of less than five years if the person fails to comply with the order;
(c) the person pay a fine;
(d) the person do or refrain from doing any act;
(e) in respect of a person referred to in rule 429, the person's property be sequestered; and
(f) the person pay costs.
|
466. Sous réserve de la règle 467, est coupable d'outrage au tribunal quiconque :
a) étant présent à une audience de la
Cour, ne se comporte pas avec respect, ne garde pas le silence ou manifeste son approbation ou sa désapprobation du déroulement de l'instance;
b) désobéit à un moyen de contrainte ou à une ordonnance de la Cour;
c) agit de façon à entraver la bonne
administration de la justice ou à porter atteinte à l'autorité ou à la dignité de la Cour;
d) étant un fonctionnaire de la Cour,
n'accomplit pas ses fonctions;
e) étant un shérif ou un huissier, n'exécute pas immédiatement un bref ou ne dresse pas le procès-verbal d'exécution, ou enfreint une règle dont la violation le rend passible d'une peine.
|
| 467 . (1) Sous réserve de la règle 468, avant qu'une personne puisse être reconnue coupable d'outrage au tribunal, une ordonnance, rendue sur requête d'une personne ayant un intérêt dans l'instance ou sur l'initiative de la Cour, doit lui être
signifiée. Cette ordonnance lui enjoint :
a) de comparaître devant un juge aux
date, heure et lieu précisés;
b) d'être prête à entendre la preuve de
l'acte qui lui est reproché, dont une
description suffisamment détaillée est
donnée pour lui permettre de connaître la nature des accusations portées contre elle;
c) d'être prête à présenter une défense.
(2) Une requête peut être présentée ex parte pour obtenir l'ordonnance visée au paragraphe (1).
(3) La Cour peut rendre l'ordonnance
visée au paragraphe (1) si elle est d'avis qu'il existe une preuve prima facie de l'outrage reproché.
(4) Sauf ordonnance contraire de la Cour, l'ordonnance visée au paragraphe (1) et les documents à l'appui sont signifiés à personne.
468. En cas d'urgence, une personne peut être reconnue coupable d'outrage au tribunal pour un acte commis en présence d'un juge et condamnée sur-le-champ, pourvu qu'on lui ait demandé de justifier
son comportement.
469. La déclaration de culpabilité dans le cas d'outrage au tribunal est fondée sur une preuve hors de tout doute raisonnable.
470. (1) Sauf directives contraires de la Cour, les témoignages dans le cadre d'une requête pour une ordonnance d'outrage au tribunal, sauf celle visée au paragraphe 467(1), sont donnés oralement.
(2) La personne à qui l'outrage au tribunal est reproché ne peut être contrainte à témoigner.
471. La Cour peut, si elle l'estime
nécessaire, demander l'assistance du
procureur général du Canada dans les
instances pour outrage au tribunal.
472. Lorsqu'une personne est reconnue coupable d'outrage au tribunal, le juge peut ordonner :
a) qu'elle soit incarcérée pour une période de moins de cinq ans ou jusqu'à ce qu'elle se conforme à l'ordonnance;
b) qu'elle soit incarcérée pour une période de moins de cinq ans si elle ne se conforme pas à l'ordonnance;
c) qu'elle paie une amende;
d) qu'elle accomplisse un acte ou
s'abstienne de l'accomplir;
e) que les biens de la personne soient mis sous séquestre, dans le cas visé à la règle 429;
f) qu'elle soit condamnée aux dépens.
|
|
__________________
1 This provision, together with all others in the Act cited in these reasons are quoted in the attached Appendix.
2 It is agreed that the Deputy Commissioner has authority in the present case to execute the powers of the Commissioner.
3 It is agreed that the Honourable B.J. Greenberg would so act on the same footing as the Commissioner. The Federal Court Rules provide a due process procedure respecting contempt and allows the imposition of sanctions. See the attached Appendix for Rules 466 to 472.
4 See C.P. Ltd. v. Matsqui Indian Bands [1995] 1 S.C.R. 3 at pp. 25-26.
5 See National Bank of Greece (Canada) v. Katsikanouris [1990] 2 S.C.R. 1029 at 1040.
6 See Driedger on the Construction of Statutes, 3rd ed. at 209:
The courts often caution that the limited class rule is not a binding rule of law. It is merely an application of the contextual principle, which may serve as a starting point for analysis but should not be considered conclusive. As Duff J. said in Johnston v. Canadian Credit Men"s Trust Assn.:
The rule is a working rule of construction which, properly applied, is of assistance in elucidating the intention of the legislature; although there is too much reason to think that sometimes the result of applying it has been to override that intention.
Even though the conditions for applying the rule are present, it may be inappropriate to do so given the legislature"s purpose, other features of the context or some overriding principle or policy.
7 Mr. Rowat has argued that a "breach of confidentiality" of the kind in the present case is not a subject which falls within the jurisdiction conferred by s.30(1)(f). I give no weight to this argument since s.30(1)(f) places no limits on the subject matter required to be investigated on a complaint received by the Commissioner.
McLachlin J. (as she then was) in United Nurses of Alberta v. Alberta (Attorney General), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 901 at 931 states as follows:
A person who simply breaches a court order, for example by failing to abide by visiting hours stipulated in a child custody order, is viewed as having committed civil contempt. However, when the element of public defiance of the court"s process in a way calculated to lessen societal respect for the courts is added to the breach, it becomes criminal.
8 Article 50 of the Quebec Civil Code of Procedure reads as follows:.
Anyone is guilty of contempt of court who disobeys any process or order of the court or of a judge thereof, or who acts in such a way as to interfere with the orderly administration of justice, or to impair the authority or dignity of the court.
9 Respondents" Confidential Memorandum, p. 10.
10 Ibid., pp. 32-33.
11 Confidential Applicant"s Application Record, p. 136.
12 Respondents" Confidential Memorandum, p. 37.
13 Ibid., p. 39.
Email this Content