C-5.3 - Cannabis Regulation Act

Full text
79. For the purposes of an investigation relating to an offence under the first paragraph of section 23 or 25, a judge of the Court of Québec may, on an ex parte application following an information laid in writing and under oath by a police force member, issue an authorization in writing permitting any police force member to use any investigative technique or procedure or do anything described by the judge that would, if not so authorized, constitute an unreasonable search or seizure in respect of a person or a person’s property.
The authorization may be obtained by telewarrant in accordance with the procedure set out in the Code of Penal Procedure (chapter C-25.1), with the necessary modifications.
The judge may not, however, authorize the interception of a private communication, as defined in section 183 of the Criminal Code (R.S.C 1985, c. C-46). Nor may the judge authorize the observation by means of a television camera or other similar electronic device of any person who is engaged in an activity in circumstances in which the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The judge may issue the authorization if the judge is satisfied
(a)  that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence against the first paragraph of section 23 or 25 has been or will be committed and that information concerning the offence will be obtained through the use of the technique or procedure or the doing of the thing;
(b)  that it is in the best interests of the administration of justice to issue the authorization; and
(c)  that there is no provision in the Code of Penal Procedure that would provide for a warrant, authorization or order permitting the technique or procedure to be used or the thing to be done.
Nothing in the first paragraph may be construed as permitting interference with the physical integrity of any person.
The authorization must set out such terms and conditions as the judge considers appropriate, in the circumstances, to ensure that the search or seizure is reasonable and to protect lawyers’ and notaries’ professional secrecy.
In the case of an authorization to enter and search a place covertly, the judge must require that notice of the entry and search be given after its execution within the time that the judge considers appropriate in the circumstances.
Where the judge who grants an authorization to enter and search covertly or any other judge having jurisdiction to grant such an authorization is satisfied, on an ex parte application made on the basis of an affidavit submitted in support of an application for extension, that the interests of justice warrant the granting of the application, the judge may grant an extension, or a subsequent extension, of the period referred to in the seventh paragraph, but no extension may exceed one year.
The execution of an authorization issued under this section may not commence more than 15 days after it is issued or end more than 30 days after the expiry of that 15-day period. However, if the judge is satisfied, on an ex parte application made on the basis of an affidavit submitted in support of an application for extension to complete the execution of the authorization, that the interests of justice warrant the granting of the application, the judge may grant an extension of not more than 30 days. The execution of the authorization may not commence, without the written authorization of the judge who granted it, before 7 a.m. or after 8 p.m., or on a holiday.
The powers and duties conferred on or assigned to a judge of the Court of Québec under this section may also be exercised by a justice of the peace within the limits provided by law and specified in the justice’s deed of appointment.
2018, c. 192018, c. 19, s. 19.
In force: 2018-08-07
79. For the purposes of an investigation relating to an offence under the first paragraph of section 23 or 25, a judge of the Court of Québec may, on an ex parte application following an information laid in writing and under oath by a police force member, issue an authorization in writing permitting any police force member to use any investigative technique or procedure or do anything described by the judge that would, if not so authorized, constitute an unreasonable search or seizure in respect of a person or a person’s property.
The authorization may be obtained by telewarrant in accordance with the procedure set out in the Code of Penal Procedure (chapter C-25.1), with the necessary modifications.
The judge may not, however, authorize the interception of a private communication, as defined in section 183 of the Criminal Code (R.S.C 1985, c. C-46). Nor may the judge authorize the observation by means of a television camera or other similar electronic device of any person who is engaged in an activity in circumstances in which the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The judge may issue the authorization if the judge is satisfied
(a)  that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence against the first paragraph of section 23 or 25 has been or will be committed and that information concerning the offence will be obtained through the use of the technique or procedure or the doing of the thing;
(b)  that it is in the best interests of the administration of justice to issue the authorization; and
(c)  that there is no provision in the Code of Penal Procedure that would provide for a warrant, authorization or order permitting the technique or procedure to be used or the thing to be done.
Nothing in the first paragraph may be construed as permitting interference with the physical integrity of any person.
The authorization must set out such terms and conditions as the judge considers appropriate, in the circumstances, to ensure that the search or seizure is reasonable and to protect lawyers’ and notaries’ professional secrecy.
In the case of an authorization to enter and search a place covertly, the judge must require that notice of the entry and search be given after its execution within the time that the judge considers appropriate in the circumstances.
Where the judge who grants an authorization to enter and search covertly or any other judge having jurisdiction to grant such an authorization is satisfied, on an ex parte application made on the basis of an affidavit submitted in support of an application for extension, that the interests of justice warrant the granting of the application, the judge may grant an extension, or a subsequent extension, of the period referred to in the seventh paragraph, but no extension may exceed one year.
The execution of an authorization issued under this section may not commence more than 15 days after it is issued or end more than 30 days after the expiry of that 15-day period. However, if the judge is satisfied, on an ex parte application made on the basis of an affidavit submitted in support of an application for extension to complete the execution of the authorization, that the interests of justice warrant the granting of the application, the judge may grant an extension of not more than 30 days. The execution of the authorization may not commence, without the written authorization of the judge who granted it, before 7 a.m. or after 8 p.m., or on a holiday.
The powers and duties conferred on or assigned to a judge of the Court of Québec under this section may also be exercised by a justice of the peace within the limits provided by law and specified in the justice’s deed of appointment.
2018, c. 192018, c. 19, s. 19.