The saga of the mysterious “ghost criminal trial” in Quebec is far from over. The country’s highest court began hearing the case Tuesday, in the first of two days of hearings.
The facts date back to March 2022. A redacted judgment from the Quebec Court of Appeal revealed the holding of a trial that was held in the greatest secrecy. The case concerned an anonymous police informant, whose identity had to be kept secret for security reasons.
All details of the proceedings, such as the file number, the nature of the crime, the location of the trial or the names of the lawyers, police officers and judges involved have never been disclosed to the public. The trial had also not been entered in the court docket. Daily life The Press finally revealed the affair in March 2022.
Several media and organizations denounced this way of proceeding, highlighting the risk of the population losing confidence in the judicial system. The Chief Justice of Canada, Richard Wagner, himself criticized the holding of this secret trial last year.
After repeated requests to lift the veil on this trial, the Court of Appeal refused to reveal more details about this case.
Chief Justice Richard Wagner and the Supreme Court’s eight justices finally heard appeals from a dozen speakers Tuesday — including that of a media coalition, which is advocating for more transparency in the criminal justice system.
The lawyer for the journalistic coalition, Mr.e Christian Leblanc — who represents media like The Press, Radio-Canada And Quebecor — advocated for a systematic process for sending legal notices to third parties, such as the media. Traceability of exchanges would thus be ensured.
“Right now, it’s at the judge’s discretion. He can choose not to send a notice and proceed completely behind closed doors. […] For us this is the way to avoid this kind of situation,” explained Me Leblanc in interview at Duty at the end of the hearing.
If a judge believes that providing a notice risks compromising the anonymity of a police informant, the lawyer then suggests suspending the legal proceedings.
“We do not want to disclose the identity of the informant. But at the same time, for our part, we should not engage the Canadian criminal justice system in a process that would take place completely in the dark, behind closed doors, of which we were unaware even existed,” he argues.
In their testimony Tuesday, organizations such as the Canadian Association of Muslim Lawyers and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association also called for better transparency in procedures, as did lawyers from the Quebec Bar.
Indicator Privilege
The lawyer for the Attorney General of Quebec, Mr.e Pierre-Luc Beauchesne, for his part, requested a “partial unsealing” of the Court of Appeal’s file. The latter concedes that certain information can be made public as long as it does not compromise the security of the “designated person”.
Me Beauchesne also insisted on the importance of protecting the identity of police informants and maintaining flexibility for judges’ discretion. The latter did not wish to speak with the media present at the Supreme Court.
Last year, the Court of Appeal highlighted “the problem of the coexistence” of two rules in this case: the protection of police informers and the principle of publicity of judicial proceedings.
The Court then explained that this privilege is essential to protect informants who collaborate with the police, and that it ultimately serves the public interest.
A second day of hearing will be held behind closed doors on Wednesday to hear arguments from Crown lawyers and Judge Lucie Rondeau.