INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section outlines the procedure for judges to authorize wiretapping through means of telecommunication.
SECTION WORDING
184.3(8) Where a judge gives an authorization by a means of telecommunication that produces a writing, the judge shall (a) complete and sign the authorization in writing, noting on its face the time, date and place at which it is given; (b) transmit the authorization by the means of telecommunication to the applicant, and the copy received by the applicant shall be deemed to be a facsimile referred to in paragraph (7)(b); and (c) as soon as is practicable after the authorization has been given, cause the authorization to be placed in the packet referred to in subsection 187(1) and sealed in that packet.
EXPLANATION
Section 184.3(8) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the procedure that must be followed when a judge grants an authorization for interception of communication using means of telecommunication that produces a writing. The judge must complete and sign the authorization in writing, noting the time, date, and place at which it is given. They must also transmit the authorization by the means of telecommunication to the applicant, who receives a deemed facsimile copy. Furthermore, the judge must ensure that the authorization is placed in a sealed packet referred to in Subsection 187(1) as soon as practical after it is granted. This packet is considered evidence in a court of law, and it is required to be securely sealed to maintain its integrity and credibility. This section plays a crucial role in regulating the use of telecommunication interception as a means of gathering evidence against a person under investigation. It ensures that the process is transparent and conforms to the principles of procedural fairness and natural justice. Moreover, it provides for the security of the authorization, making it difficult for unauthorized access or alteration. In essence, Section 184.3(8) safeguards judicial discretion and upholds the integrity of the court system in facilitating telecommunication interception. It ensures that the operation of law enforcement agencies is closely regulated and scrutinized, limiting the possibility of abuse or misuse of interception provisions in the Criminal Code of Canada.
COMMENTARY
Section 184.3(8) of the Criminal Code of Canada governs the use of telecommunication means for giving authorization for wiretapping or interception of communications pursuant to a warrant. This provision is critical in regulating the use of electronic surveillance, which has become increasingly important in modern law enforcement and intelligence gathering activities. Section 184.3(8) requires that any judge who gives authorization by a means of telecommunication that produces a writing must complete and sign the authorization in writing. The judge is further required to note on the face of the authorization the time, date, and place at which it is given. These requirements ensure that there is a written record of the authorization, which can be used later to hold accountable those who misuse or abuse the system. The provision also mandates that the judge transmit the authorization by the means of telecommunication to the applicant, such that the copy received by the applicant is deemed to be a facsimile referred to in paragraph (7)(b). This requirement enables the applicant to have immediate access to the authorization, which is essential for the efficient and effective execution of the warrant. Further, Section 184.3(8) requires that the judge cause the authorization to be placed in the packet referred to in subsection 187(1) as soon as practicable after it has been given. This provides an extra layer of accountability, ensuring that all authorizations are recorded and stored in an appropriate manner. The regulation of electronic surveillance is a subject that has attracted much attention as a result of recent developments. As the use of telecommunication means for giving authorization increases, there is a need to have regulations in place to ensure that the electronic surveillance system is used in a way that is consistent with the rule of law. The requirements set out in Section 184.3(8) are essential in ensuring that the use of electronic surveillance is carried out within a legal framework that respects Canadians' rights and freedoms. Section 184.3(8) specifically mandates the creation of a written record of the authorization and its transmission to the applicant. These requirements ensure that the authorization process remains transparent, and there is accountability for its use. Moreover, the provision enhances the efficiency of the process by allowing the use of telecommunication means to give authorization. It enables the authorization to be given and accessed quickly and effectively, which allows for the execution of the warrant with immediacy. The Section 184.3(8) provision ensures appropriate use of telecommunication means in giving authorization, promoting the use thereof while protecting the privacy and rights of individuals. In conclusion, Section 184.3(8) of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision in the regulation of electronic surveillance. Its requirements ensure that judges who give authorizations by means of telecommunication produce a written record of the authorization's essential details and quickly transmit it to the applicant. This provision promotes accountability, transparency, and efficiency in the use of electronic surveillance, while also protecting the privacy and rights of individuals.
STRATEGY
Section 184.3(8) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial aspect of the criminal justice system that governs electronic surveillance. This section outlines the procedures that must be followed when a judge authorizes electronic surveillance using telecommunications technology that produces a writing. Strategic considerations when dealing with this section include compliance with legal requirements, proper documentation, and efficient communication. One key strategic consideration is to ensure that all legal requirements are met. The authorization must be issued by a judge, and they must follow the proper procedures outlined in the section. Failure to comply with these requirements could undermine the admissibility of any evidence obtained through the electronic surveillance, which could have significant consequences for any subsequent legal proceedings. Proper documentation is another important strategic consideration. The judge must complete and sign the authorization in writing, noting the time, date, and place at which it was given. This documentation must be transmitted to the applicant, and a copy received by the applicant is deemed to be a facsimile. Additionally, the authorization must be placed in a sealed packet and included in the packet referred to in subsection 187(1) as soon as practicable after authorization has been given. This documentation is critical to ensuring that the authorization and any evidence obtained through electronic surveillance may be admitted in court. Efficient communication is also a strategic consideration when dealing with this section. Telecommunications technology allows remote communication and authorization to occur, but it is necessary to ensure that all parties involved are aware of what is happening and that communication channels work smoothly. In cases where the applicant and the judge are not in the same location, telecommunication channels should be tested in advance to eliminate the potential for interruptions or misunderstandings. One strategy that could be employed when dealing with this section is to work closely with legal professionals to ensure that all legal requirements are met. Lawyers can provide guidance on the proper procedures and documentation to be followed. This can help minimize the potential for admissibility challenges that could undermine the evidence obtained through electronic surveillance. Another strategy is to use secure telecommunications technology that minimizes the risk of interception or tampering. Secure messaging apps or video conferencing tools can help ensure that communication channels are not compromised. In conclusion, section 184.3(8) of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines crucial procedures that must be followed when authorizing electronic surveillance using telecommunication technology that produces a writing. Strategic considerations when dealing with this section include complying with legal requirements, proper documentation, and efficient communication. Employing strategies such as working closely with legal professionals, using secure telecommunications technology, and testing communication channels in advance can help ensure that these requirements are met.