The Supreme Court of Canada has ruled. The country’s highest judicial body confirms the ban on the media publishing details before a jury is constituted.
Friday’s ruling was intended to clarify whether publication bans apply before a jury convenes. Section 648 (1) of the Criminal Code prohibits the publication or dissemination of information about the phases of a criminal proceeding without a jury.
The question was whether this prohibition applies before the jury is constituted, having regard to paragraph 645(5) of the Criminal Code, which gives the trial judge, before its constitution, the power to decide on matters normally heard without a jury.
The Supreme Court of Canada has heard two joint appeals on the matter. In both cases, the judges rejected these media requests and concluded that Section 648 (1) of the Criminal Code applies before the jury is filled.
In the first case, Frédérick Silva was charged in the Quebec Superior Court with four counts of murder and one count of attempted murder.
The daily La Presse had appealed the judge’s decision, which banned the publication of details about the preliminary stages of the trial, including a request for a stay and withdrawal of evidence.
“We believe that the principle of modern statutory interpretation, combined with the evidence and parliamentary debates, should have led the court to conclude that Section 648 of the Criminal Code only applies after jury selection and not before.” Nevertheless, La Presse takes the im “We acknowledge and respect the reasons set out in the court’s ruling,” replied the daily’s lawyer, Marc-André Nadon, in an interview with Le Devoir.
The lawyer adds that it is positive that the verdict has ended the long-standing debate and has now cleared up all ambiguities regarding this article of the law.
Disappointed with the decision
In the second case, which was unrelated to the first, Aydin Coban was charged in British Columbia with multiple offenses including child pornography, extortion, child enticement and harassment. He was convicted of, among other things, harassment and extortion of Amanda Todd, who committed suicide in 2012 at the age of 15.
Some media outlets, including CBC/Radio-Canada, believed that the publication ban was an obstacle to press freedom. They therefore asked the first instance court to clarify the publication ban and only put it into effect after the jury has been selected.
“We are disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision. “We believe it is important to strengthen the freedom of the press guaranteed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” Radio-Canada’s head of media relations only commented via email.
Chief Justice Wagner emphasized that the public can only understand the work of the courts and therefore have confidence in the judicial process and the outcome of the proceedings if they are informed about the content and reasons for the judges’ decisions.
La Presse’s lawyer, Me Nadon, concludes that Friday’s decision will ultimately have little impact on legal practice. “The situation does not change because in Quebec and elsewhere in Canada, even before the decision, several courts adopted the approach that was ultimately adopted by the Supreme Court,” he explains. “But it certainly clears up any ambiguity and now Canadian citizens have the truth.”