In R. v. Pike (Ont CA, 2024) the Ontario Court of Appeal considers a Crown appeal of a Charter s.8 search and seizure strike-down of the s.99(1) ['Examination of goods'] Customs Act provision:
[1] ... The principal issue in these appeals is whether s. 99(1)(a) of the Customs Act is constitutional.
[2] The answer is clear: It is not. Section 8 of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees everyone the right to be secure against unreasonable searches. I agree with the trial judge that s. 99(1)(a) of the Customs Act offends this basic guarantee because it authorizes border officers to search some of the most private information imaginable on the lowest possible standard to justify a search, namely that in the border officers’ own minds, they were sincerely trying to find evidence of border law violations. While sincerity is a good start, it is just not enough. Our Charter requires more because Canada’s border control interests temper but do not eliminate or gut its protections. A reasonable search in this context requires a reasonable suspicion, meaning objective facts that establish a reasonable possibility that officers will find evidence of border law violations on the device. The Crown in this matter has not justified the law’s failure to require those objective facts prior to conducting the searches, which the Customs Act requires for other highly intrusive searches and which the Canada Border Services Agency admits would not jeopardize its mandate.
At paras 27-111 the court affirms the trial judge's finding that Charter s.8 overrides s.99(1) of the Customs Act.
The author has waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to this Isthatlegal.ca webpage.
