The Supreme Court of Canada will look into the case of the “shadow trial” which was held in Quebec in disturbing secrecy, out of sight.
The highest court in the country announced Thursday morning that it agreed to hear this case.
It was the Quebec government that asked the Supreme Court to take up the case and order the Court of Appeal to reveal more information about this criminal trial.
A group of media, among which are The PressRadio Canada, The Canadian Press and the daily newspapers of the Coops de l’information, have made a similar request, enjoining it to hear this case, which involves the balance to be respected between the publicity of legal proceedings and that of the protection of police informers — necessary to solving crimes.
The existence of this phantom trial was revealed in March 2022 by a judgment of the Court of Appeal.
The latter had then pronounced a halt to the criminal proceedings brought against a police informant who, for an unknown reason, found herself accused of a crime… which she had apparently herself denounced. The bench of three judges had also issued confidentiality orders and the sealing of the proceedings, notes and documents of the case.
The Court of Appeal said it was shocked that this trial was held in the greatest of secrets: no file number, nor the names of the judges and lawyers who argued the case. Even the name of the judicial district where the case took place is kept in shadow and under padlock. Without this judgment of the Court of Appeal, we would not even have known that he had indeed held.
Among those who were indignant at this opaque way of proceeding are the media, the Minister of Justice Simon Jolin-Barrette and the Chief Justice of the Court of Quebec, Lucie Rondeau.
Subsequently called upon to reveal more information on this criminal prosecution, the Court of Appeal flatly refused: “There can be no question of disclosing any information likely to make it possible to identify ‘Designated Person’ (name given to the informant of police in the judgement) at the risk of putting her in danger”.
No one demanded to know his name, but Quebec nevertheless ordered the Court of Appeal to make public all information that is not likely to allow his identification.
This judgment raised significant questions and concerns among the Quebec population, and “damaged public confidence in the administration of justice”, insisted Quebec in its brief filed with the Supreme Court to convince it to hear the ‘affair.