What is the test for committal in a criminal case?

The committal hearing involves the same test as a preliminary inquiry. The extradition judge will generally order the committal of the person sought to be extradited if the judge concludes that there is admissible evidence upon which a reasonable jury, properly instructed, could convict the person sought. The extradition judge is permitted, however, to remove evidence from judicial consideration if the judge is satisfied that the evidence is so manifestly unreliable or defective that it should be disregarded and given no weight: see United States of America v. Ferras; United States of America v. Latty, 2006 SCC 33, [2006] 2 S.C.R. 77 at paras. 48 and 59.

It is not the function of the extradition judge to consider the means by which the foreign officials may have prepared the evidence for the extradition hearing. Nor is it the judge's function to weigh the ultimate issue as to the effect of any delay on the trial in the jurisdiction of the extradition partner. Nor is it open to the extradition judge to consider the application of any defences that might be raised at trial by the person sought: see Argentina v. Mellino, 1987 CanLII 49 (SCC), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 536, at paras. 28-38; United States of America v. Lépine, 1994 CanLII 116 (SCC), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 286, at paras.10 and 20.

Extradition is meant to be an expeditious process by which Canada surrenders persons sought to its partner nations in prompt compliance with its international obligations. The hearing is not a trial, nor should it be allowed to become a trial, as though it were a domestic criminal proceeding: see Germany v. Schreiber, at para. 57.