What is the legal test for a Charter-based waiver of a procedural right?

In the context of waivers of Charter‑based rights, there is no authority that equates the term “high” with a standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Rather, reference to a high standard refers to the requirement of clarity of the explanation of the rights being waived, not to a high burden of proof. As stated by Lamer J. (as he then was) in Korponay v. Attorney General of Canada, 1982 CanLII 12 (SCC), [1982] 1 S.C.R. 41, at p. 49, the validity of a waiver of a procedural right for the holder’s benefit, including a Charter right, “is dependent upon it being clear and unequivocal that the person is waiving the procedural safeguard and is doing so with full knowledge of the rights the procedure was enacted to protect” (emphasis deleted). See also Clarkson v. The Queen, 1986 CanLII 61 (SCC), [1986] 1 S.C.R. 383, at pp. 394-95. The use of the term “high” and “clear and unequivocal” does not however mean proof beyond a reasonable doubt.