N.B. Crown drops case
under controversial
Criminal Code section
VALERIE MUTTON
Amid a hue and cry from high
places — including support from six
University of New Brunswick law
professors—a Fredericton blogger
won’t be prosecuted for defamatory
libel under a controversial section
of the Criminal Code, after the
Crown withdrew the charge.
The professors took the
unusual step of sending a letter to
the New Brunswick Attorney
General to protest against the
potential prosecution of Charles
LeBlanc, after his arrest by Fredericton police last fall.
The Crown announced on May
4, that it would not proceed with a
criminal prosecution for defamatory libel under the rarely used s.
301 of the Criminal Code.
LeBlanc, an activist who is frequently critical of those in authority, especially the police, wrote a
blog post last year in which he
made disparaging comments
against a police officer. LeBlanc
was arrested and his computer
was seized following the execution
of a search warrant at his home.
The law professors asked the
Attorney General to review
whether it was in the public interest to prosecute anyone under s.
301, since it had been found by
courts in Ontario, Newfoundland
and Labrador, and Saskatchewan
STEPHEN MACGILLIVRAY / FREDERICTON DAILY GLEANER / THE CANADIAN PRESS
Blogger Charles LeBlanc, after a 2009 arrest at the New Brunswick legislature, is led away by Fredericton police.
to contravene the Charter right to
freedom of expression. The section does not require an intent to
defame, and even individuals who
were speaking the truth could be
subject to sanctions.
Jula Hughes, one of the signa-
tories to the letter, told The Law-
yers Weekly that the professors got
involved because “it is somewhat
of an exception for a citizen of our
province to face prosecution under
a section which is widely recog-
nized to be unconstitutional.”
Hughes explained that in New
Brunswick, the Crown’s office
reviews files in advance of laying
charges rather than the method
followed in some other jurisdic-
tions, such as Ontario, in which
people are charged first and the
files are later reviewed on their
merits by the Crown. The letter
was written, she said, to provide
an opportunity for the Crown to
look at the likelihood of conviction
before LeBlanc was drawn into the
system. The law professors wrote
that the test for going ahead with a
prosecution is not only whether
there is a likelihood of a convic-
tion, but also whether the prosecu-
tion is in the public interest.
Reviews of police conduct were ‘complicated’
G20
Continued From Page 1
established in September, 2010.
“In policing, there are always
lessons that can be learned and
applied to future events. The G20
presented an opportunity for
objective parties to step back, to
look at what happened, how it
happened and why it happened,”
Teschner said.
Former Ontario Court of
Appeal justice John Morden, now
general counsel at Heenan Blaikie, is conducting the police services board review.
Teschner, who also practises at
Heenan Blaikie, said a number of
factors account for the time spent
preparing the report that he says
will focus mainly on civilian oversight of police activities during
the summit.
“There are more than 50
issues to deal with and questions
from pre-planning to the event
itself,” he explained. “And we had
to sort through and examine
90,000 Toronto police files and
documents.”
As well, the Morden review
interviewed Toronto police Chief
Bill Blair over five days. And it
conducted three days of public
hearings in different parts of
Toronto last summer.
Marin
take a “systemic” review of
specific issues, such as alleged
unlawful arrests and improper
detention, as well as broader con-
cerns, such as the “overall
improvement of police practices.”
Among those concerns, the
OIPRD cited “governance of the
planning and implementation” of
policing the summit, police com-
mand structures, operational
decision-making processes and
training of officers.
