Les policiers peuvent exceptionnellement retarder la mise en application du droit prévu à l’alinéa 10b) de la Charte après avoir considéré les circonstances particulières entourant leur intervention et avoir raisonnablement conclu qu’il en ressort que leur protection, celle du public ou la nécessité de préserver un élément de preuve le requiert

R. v. Griffith, 2021 ONCA 302

Lien vers la décision

[38]      Courts have recognized that specific circumstances, including concerns for police safety, public safety, or the preservation of evidence, may justify some delay in providing a detainee access to counsel: Suberu, at para. 42; Rover, at para. 26; and La, at para. 38. Such concerns must be case-specific rather than general concerns applicable to virtually any case: Rover, at para. 27; La, at paras. 39-40. As Doherty J.A. explained in Rover — decided almost a year after the execution of the warrants in this case — the police may delay access to counsel “only after turning their mind to the specifics of the circumstances and concluding, on some reasonable basis, that police or public safety, or the need to preserve evidence, justifies some delay in granting access to counsel”: Rover, at para. 27. Even if such circumstances exist, the police must take reasonable steps to minimize the delay in granting access to counsel: Rover, at para. 27; La, at para. 40.