Justice V. Cook Case Study

1405 Words6 Pages

The Top Five
Canada (Justice) v. Khadr

Do you think the charter should always apply to the activities of the Canadian government officials exercising functions outside Canada? I concur with the Federal court's findings in that, The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms were created to protect the rights and freedoms of Canadian citizens in Canada. Outside of Canada, citizens are protected by international laws between sovereign states. Therefore, crimes committed in other judicial sanctions should be dealt with by their own court of law, without interference of other countries sovereignty. The case of R. v. Cook is an exception; Canadian authorities interrogated Cook, a Canadian citizen, outside of Canada. The authorities abide by the charters therefore infringing on Cooks right when they neglected to inform him of his right to counsel until after questioning.
Should Canadian police carry out or participate in a search that is legal in the foreign country where an investigation is being carried out if a similar search would not be legal in Canada? No, as Canadian police are in international jurisdiction they are not recognized as police; therefore, assisting in the conducted search would be unlawful. Besides, evidence would by unlawfully obtained; therefore, is would unrecognized by the Canadian judicial system. …show more content…

Cook and R.v. Hape. I think the legal argument in the case of R.v. Cook is more prevalent than the grounds in R.v.Hape; therefore, I agree with the Cook test. Khadr was questioned by United States interrogators along with Canadian interrogators, and for that reason he should have had his rights recognized under the Charter. Whereas, in the Hape test the Supreme Court decided: if the Charter interfered with the sovereignty of another country within their borders, it does not apply. Ultimately, the court recognized the Hape test with regards to Khadr and I believe that was an oversight made by our legal