Les policiers ne sont pas tenus de contacter un tiers à la demande du détenu si ce dernier ne justifie pas la raison sous-tendant ce contact

R. v. Mumtaz, 2019 ONSC 468

Lien vers la décision

[36]           While the respondent said he wished to speak with Constable Bhargava in the context of being advised of his right to counsel, he acknowledged that he never advised Constable Kokot why he wished to speak with his friend.

[37]           The law is clear that when a detainee makes a request to contact a third party in order to facilitate contact with counsel, the police must facilitate this. 

[38]           But, when a detainee does not indicate to the police the reason why he or she wishes to contact a third person, there is no legal obligation on the police to permit contact with that third party or to make further inquiries as to the reason the detainee wishes to make contact.  No authority was provided suggesting that a request to speak to a third party that is made in the context of a discussion about the right to counsel requires an officer to facilitate contact.  Nor was any authority provided to support a position that the police are required to ask why the detainee wants to speak to the third party. 

[39]           To the contrary, even when requests to speak to third parties were made in the same context as occurred here, as took place in the cases of Cheema, Adams and Zoghaib, courts have not imposed on the police an obligation to ask why the detainee wishes to speak to the third party.  Nor have they imposed on the police an obligation to facilitate contact with the third party.  Rather, in keeping with the requirement that it is for the detainee to assert a desire to speak with counsel of choice before the police are required to facilitate the implementation of that right, the obligation has been, consistently, on the detainee to explain to police why he or she wishes to speak to a third party.