Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT: A Tempest in Canada

Robert Currie

Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT: A Tempest in Canada

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

One of the most pervasive and longstanding problems in the practice of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters between states has been ‘form of evidence’–specifically, can the requested state provide evidence in such form as will be useful and admissible under the criminal evidence laws of the requesting state?It tends to be common law states that have difficulties with admissibility of MLAT-sourced evidence, and these often develop ‘work-arounds’ in their laws which attempt to relax admissibility standards. Canada is one such state, but a series of recent prosecutions has revealed judicial resistance to the tools employed. This note examines these cases and suggests some lessons they contain for broader practice.

Original language	Canadian English
Journal	Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press
Publication status	Published - Jan. 1 2022

Keywords

Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters
Inter-State Cooperation
Law of Evidence
Domestic Implementation of Transnational Criminal Law
Canada

Disciplines

Criminal Law
Criminal Procedure
International Law
Jurisdiction
Law
Transnational Law

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT A Tempest in CanadaFinal published version, 338 KBLicence: Unspecified

Cite this

@article{11a9164538464c16a17a81bc49609d7c,

title = "Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT: A Tempest in Canada",

abstract = " One of the most pervasive and longstanding problems in the practice of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters between states has been {\textquoteleft}form of evidence{\textquoteright}–specifically, can the requested state provide evidence in such form as will be useful and admissible under the criminal evidence laws of the requesting state?It tends to be common law states that have difficulties with admissibility of MLAT-sourced evidence, and these often develop {\textquoteleft}work-arounds{\textquoteright} in their laws which attempt to relax admissibility standards. Canada is one such state, but a series of recent prosecutions has revealed judicial resistance to the tools employed. This note examines these cases and suggests some lessons they contain for broader practice.",

keywords = "Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters, Inter-State Cooperation, Law of Evidence, Domestic Implementation of Transnational Criminal Law, Canada",

author = "Robert Currie",

note = "Robert Currie, {"}Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT: A Tempest in Canada{"} (2022) 1:2 Transnational Crim L Rev 123.",

year = "2022",

month = jan,

day = "1",

language = "Canadian English",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT: A Tempest in Canada

AU - Currie, Robert

N1 - Robert Currie, "Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT: A Tempest in Canada" (2022) 1:2 Transnational Crim L Rev 123.

PY - 2022/1/1

Y1 - 2022/1/1

N2 - One of the most pervasive and longstanding problems in the practice of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters between states has been ‘form of evidence’–specifically, can the requested state provide evidence in such form as will be useful and admissible under the criminal evidence laws of the requesting state?It tends to be common law states that have difficulties with admissibility of MLAT-sourced evidence, and these often develop ‘work-arounds’ in their laws which attempt to relax admissibility standards. Canada is one such state, but a series of recent prosecutions has revealed judicial resistance to the tools employed. This note examines these cases and suggests some lessons they contain for broader practice.

AB - One of the most pervasive and longstanding problems in the practice of mutual legal assistance in criminal matters between states has been ‘form of evidence’–specifically, can the requested state provide evidence in such form as will be useful and admissible under the criminal evidence laws of the requesting state?It tends to be common law states that have difficulties with admissibility of MLAT-sourced evidence, and these often develop ‘work-arounds’ in their laws which attempt to relax admissibility standards. Canada is one such state, but a series of recent prosecutions has revealed judicial resistance to the tools employed. This note examines these cases and suggests some lessons they contain for broader practice.

KW - Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

KW - Inter-State Cooperation

KW - Law of Evidence

KW - Domestic Implementation of Transnational Criminal Law

KW - Canada

UR - https://digitalcommons.schulichlaw.dal.ca/scholarly_works/990

M3 - Article

JO - Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

JF - Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press

ER -

Admissibility of Hearsay Gathered Under MLAT: A Tempest in Canada

Abstract

Keywords

Disciplines

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this