October, 1997

BACKGROUNDER

The Government's Response to R. v. Feeney

On May 22, 1997, the Supreme Court of Canada delivered its decision on R. v. Feeney. The Court ruled that, as a general rule, police required a warrant to enter a private dwelling to arrest someone. The decision overturned existing case law that did not require the police to obtain a warrant to enter if the arresting officer had reasonable grounds to arrest someone and, prior to entering, indicated his or her presence, authority and reason for entry. The Supreme Court of Canada found that, in this situation, the privacy rights of Canadians under the Charter were not adequately protected.

The Attorney General of British Columbia, later joined by other provinces and the federal government, successfully applied to the Supreme Court of Canada to suspend its judgement for six months so Parliament could address the effects of the ruling. The government is doing so through the legislative proposals introduced today.

Clear Procedures for Applying for Warrants:

The proposals reflect the Supreme Court of Canada decision by requiring police officers to obtain an authorization or a warrant before entering a private dwelling unless exigent circumstances exist that would make it impractical to do so. Proposed amendments to the Criminal Code would allow a peace officer to apply in person or by any means of telecommunication to a judge or justice for a warrant authorizing:

the peace officer to enter a private dwelling to arrest a person if the judge or justice is satisfied that a warrant of arrest for that person exists and there are reasonable grounds to believe that person is in the dwelling; or

the peace officer to enter a private dwelling to arrest a person whose identity is known or who can be identified if the judge or justice is satisfied there are reasonable grounds to arrest that person and to believe that person is in the dwelling.

The proposed legislation would also allow a judge, when issuing an arrest warrant, to also authorize entry of a specific dwelling if the judge is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the person subject to the arrest warrant is or will be inside.

The bill would allow peace officers to enter a private dwelling without a warrant in "exigent" or pressing circumstances where it is not feasible to obtain one. These include, but are not limited to, situations where:

there is a reasonable suspicion that entry is necessary to prevent imminent bodily harm or death to anyone; or

there are reasonable grounds to believe that entry is necessary to prevent imminent loss or destruction of evidence.