Provincial Court Judge Blasts RCMP over Charter Violations

In the case of R. v. Ho, Hou, Huang, Li and Zhou 2011 BCPC 0186, provincial court Judge P.R. Meyers blasted the RCMP for violating the Charter rights of the accused. In his reasons for judgment, Judge Meyers stated that the RCMP “ignored and flaunted the accuseds’ Charter of Rights and did so consistently over a 14 month period.” The accused individuals were charged with producing ecstasy and possessing ecstasy for the purpose of trafficking.

Over the course of the 14 month investigation there were several gross Charter violations by the RCMP. Judge Meyers notes that these Charter violations included the RCMP’s “initial choice to apply for a Telewarrant rather than to apply to a Justice or Judge in person, to knowing that the suspects probably would not speak or understand English very well but yet not bothering to arrange to have interpreters there to explain to them the reasons for their arrest and what their Charter rights were, to not showing or reading the Warrants to the occupants of two of the house, to leaving two of the accused half-naked, outdoors in the middle of the winter to be hosed down with cold water while in view of their neighbours, to not knowing that they had a legal obligation to file a Report in the Richmond Court Registry within 7 days of the execution of the Warrants.” The Judge noted that it was almost as if the searches had taken place before the Charter existed. He further noted that “the officers in charge, just did not seem to care” and that the “officers in charge of this investigation, operated throughout, in “bad faith”. Judge Meyer ruled that all evidence obtained must be excluded as a remedy under s.24(2) of the Charter.

Judge Meyer sent a clear message to the police, that is that the rights of individuals must be respected regardless of the fact that they have committed a crime. It is important for us citizens to know that our rights will be protected no matter what, but especially when the police search our homes, where we have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Judge Meyer noted in regards to the police not filing a report after the search of the homes of the accused individuals that “it is fundamental to the rights of people who are about to have their homes searched by the police to know that the courthouse in their area will have all of the legal documents pertaining to the intrusion of their privacy, available for them to inspect.” Our privacy in our home should be protected and if the police are going to invade our privacy we should be able to hold them to account on inspection of their search documents.

I hope that the police will learn from this experience and realize that the rights in the Charter are absolute, not arbitrary or temporary. The police can’t just decide that they aren’t going to respect the rights of citizens under the Charter. The rights must be respected at all times no matter what the situation. I am glad to see the courts upholding the rights afforded to us under the Charter.