A recent decision of the British Columbia Provincial Court has sparked controversy about how the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) police the border.
[I]The judgement in R. v. Sekhon was released July 13, 2007. The defendant, a Canadian citizen, was accused of smuggling cocaine into the country. An experienced border guard stopped Sekhon for questioning because of his “tense and nervous” demeanour . The resulting detention and search lasted for several hours and culminated in inspectors drilling into the defendant’s pick-up truck in search of drugs before towing the vehicle to an alternate location for further examination. Inspectors found 50 kilograms of cocaine in a false compartment under the truck bed. At trial, the defendant successfully argued that his rights under sections 8, 9 and 10 of the Charter has been violated and that the evidence should be excluded pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter.
http://www.law.ualberta.ca/centres/c...Violations.php
There is years of case law that have defined customs powers most notably R. vs. Simmons which the Supreme court of Canada has ruled that there is little to no reasonable expectation of privacy when entering Canada and warrantless searches at a Port of Entry does not violate S. 8 of the Charter. It is demonstrably justified to limit these rights at a border to protect society and the sovereignty of a Country.
Why would a judge throw out a case like this? I have no doubts that this will be won on appeal.
Thoughts?