Does the Minister of Justice have the authority to request that evidence be admitted under s. 40(3) of the Criminal Procedure Act?

The specific subjects about which evidence is proposed for admission relate generally to the fairness of proceedings conducted in foreign courts, the domestic courts of one of Canada’s extradition partners. It is the function of the Minister, not the extradition hearing judge, to monitor the implementation of extradition agreements and the administration of the Act. To ensure fairness in the event of surrender, the Minister may seek assurances under s. 40(3) of the Act. To permit the introduction of this evidence, as it seems to me, would do violence to the fundamental principles expressed by La Forest J. in Republic of Argentina v. Mellino, supra, at p. 350 C.C.C.: In particular, it is not the business of an extradition judge to assume responsibility for reviewing the actions of foreign officials in preparing the evidence for an extradition hearing. This would seem to me to be in breach of the most elementary dictates of comity between sovereign states. A foreign state obviously has jurisdiction over the actions of its officials, although, no doubt, the executive of this country must, on occasion, consider such matters in exercising its discretion to surrender a fugitive.