Canada: More On Can They Make You Talk?

Last Updated: June 27 2011
Article by Dianne Saxe

Decades after the adoption of the Canadian Charter of Rights, and Freedoms, and after thousands of Miranda warnings on TV, most Canadians think they have a right to remain silent when the government comes after them.

To some extent, this is true–people pulled off the street by uniformed police almost never have a legal obligation to answer questions, with obvious exceptions when keeping silent would expose others to harm, such as the obligations to report spills and communicable diseases.

For routine matters, though, regulated businesses actually have very little privacy, or rights to silence, vis-à-vis their regulators. There are numerous reporting obligations for regulated communities, from income tax returns to the National Pollutant Release Inventory, with the census thrown in for good measure. Many statutes, such as the Ontario Water Resources Act and Environmental Protection Act, give inspectors the rights to enter private property, go through files, take samples, and ask questions, to confirm whether a regulated organization is complying with the law. However, the Charter establishes different rules once a regulator has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that a particular person or organization has committed an offence: see Hunter v. Southam Inc., 1984 CanLII 33 (S.C.C.), [1984] 2 S.C.R. 145, and Comité paritaire de l'industrie de la chemise v. Potash; Comité paritaire de l'industrie de la chemise v. Sélection Milton, 1994 CanLII 92 (S.C.C.), [1994] 2 S.C.R. 406. (An unsubstantiated complaint does not constitute "reasonable and probable grounds".) Once s/he has reasonable and probable grounds, a regulator needs prior judicial authorization to enter private property and to compel the production of evidence.

Do these rules, which govern the production of documents, also compel people to answer questions about possible offences?

For more than 20 years, there has been an uneasy tug of war about this between the Ministry of the Environment's desire to obtain evidence of environmental offences, and the reluctance of those facing the ministry's enforcement muscle to give them that evidence. The courts have upheld the rights of individuals and businesses to decline to answer such questions, except where there is a current emergency. That is, where the ministry requires information right now to deal with a spill or other environmental crisis that is underway, the businesses and individuals have had to comply. But where the ministry is simply seeking to force people to confess details of problems that have occurred in the past, people have had a right to remain silent.

In R. v. Inco1, an Ministry of the Environment investigator entered Inco property, and asserted that he had statutory power to compel company employees to submit to questioning and produce documents and other materials. They complied, under protest, and the Ministry used the evidence thus extracted to prosecute the company. Inco moved to have the charges against it stayed as an abuse of process. The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the investigator could not use the statutory powers of an inspector, if, at the time, he had reasonable and probable grounds to believe that an offence had been committed.

The Court was interpreting the Ontario Water Resources Act as it was at the time of the investigation, in March 1994. By the time the case got to the Court of Appeal, in 2001, the Act had been amended. McMurtry C.J.O. commented on the amendments, in obiter:

[37] I am therefore of the view that under the legislative scheme as it existed at the time of this incident, the existence of reasonable and probable grounds would have limited the investigative techniques available to provincial officers. It appears that this view was held by the Legislature as amendments were passed. In order to strengthen the enforcement powers under environmental legislation[5], the OWRA and the EPA were both amended effective February 1, 1999. Among the amendments was the addition of the following provision, which is now found in s. 22.1 (2) of the OWRA and s. 163.1(2) of the EPA:

On application without notice, a justice may issue an order in writing authorizing a provincial officer, subject to this section, to use any device, investigative technique or procedure or to do any thing described in the order if the justice is satisfied by evidence under oath that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence against this Act has been or will be committed and that information concerning the offence will be obtained through the use of the device, technique or procedure or the doing of the thing.

[38] An IEB officer who has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that an environmental offence has been committed can now apply for judicial authorization to conduct questioning sessions of the type that were authorized by the former s. 15(1)(n) of the OWRA [now s. 15(2)(i)] under the "investigative technique" umbrella.

Until 2009, Ministry of the Environment investigators frequently used this quote to force people to submit to questioning, threatening them that they would be prosecuted for obstruction if they refused to answer. I often pointed out that McMurtry C.J.O. had only commented on the officer's power to "conduct questioning sessions", not on whether the person questioned had an obligation to answer. Most of those threatened, however, chose not to fight.

This issue was finally addressed in Branch v. Ontario (Environment), 2009 CanLII 104 (ON SCDC). Ministry of the Environment investigators obtained an ex parte court order against Michael Branch, manager of a facility which had had a serious fire. The order required him to attend before a Ministry investigator of the Investigations and Enforcement Branch, to submit to interrogation and to produce documents. Mr. Branch had already been asked to submit to questioning, and had declined.

Mr. Branch brought an application for judicial review of the court order. He challenged the authority of the Justice of the Peace to make such an order pursuant to s. 163.1(2) of the Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.19 (the "EPA"), and the constitutionality of any such authority.

Subsection 163.1(2) of the EPA states:

On application without notice, a justice may issue an order in writing authorizing a provincial officer, subject to this section, to use any device, investigative technique or procedure or to do any thing described in the order if the justice is satisfied by evidence under oath that there are reasonable grounds to believe that an offence against this Act has been or will be committed and that information concerning the offence will be obtained through the use of the device, technique or procedure or the doing of the thing.

Swinton J. immediately noted the difference between having authority to put questions, and compelling people to answer them:

[12] The respondent submits that the questioning of persons falls within the words "investigative technique". While I agree that questioning potential witnesses is perhaps the most basic investigative technique, an investigator has that power without the need for an order from a justice of the peace. The question in this application for judicial review is whether a justice of the peace can compel answers to questions by witnesses in a provision which deals with the grant of authority to investigators to use an "investigative technique". That is not obvious from the words of the provision...

Swinton J observed that Ontario has many regulatory statutes that compel answers to the questions of authorities:

[15]... It is noteworthy that the power to compel answers is set out explicitly in each statute, and the vast majority of them expressly allow the compelled witness to claim privilege. Most statutes also provide express protection against self-incrimination. ...

[18] In contrast, s. 163.1(2) of the EPA does not contain language explicitly compelling witnesses to speak to regulatory investigators, nor does it provide protection for privilege or protection against self-incrimination. The absence of such language in s. 163.1(2), given the large number of statutes dealing expressly with compulsion of witnesses, suggests that the Legislature did not intend to include powers of compulsion in s. 163.1(2)...

[25] There can be no doubt about the importance of effective legislation to protect the environment. However, that does not lead to the conclusion that the Legislature intended to provide IEB investigators with access to the power to compel answers from witnesses at the stage where investigators have reasonable grounds to believe that an offence has been committed.

He noted the serious Charter concerns with compelling people to provide evidence to be used against them in court, although he did not ultimately feel it necessary to decide the issue on Charter grounds.

[27] ... While the power to compel witnesses to answer questions and to produce documents is an effective investigative tool, it is also intrusive and raises concerns about the principle against self-incrimination, one of the principles of fundamental justice in s. 7 of the Charter, as well as the common law right to silence.

Swinton J. therefore quashed the order requiring Mr. Branch to attend for interrogation. In a similar decision, R. v. Morrison, [2006] O.J. No. 1889 (S.C.J.), in search warrants compelling the questioning of witnesses were quashed, on the basis that they were not authorized by the Occupational Health and Safety Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. O.1, s. 56. The trial judge held that the provision permitting the inspector to make inquiries of any person while executing a search warrant under the Act was limited to discrete questions arising during the execution of the warrant as required to render the execution effective.

However, the tug-of-war goes on. The Ministry of the Environment promptly returned to the Legislature for further amendments to its powers. Ironically, given its title, these amendments were bundled into the "Open for Business Act" and came into effect last year. The amendments added a new section to the Environmental Protection Act and the Ontario Water Resources Act:

157.0.1 (1) For the purposes of determining compliance of a person with this Act or the regulations, a provincial officer may, at any reasonable time and with any reasonable assistance, require the person, or any person employed by or providing services to the person, to respond to reasonable inquiries.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1), a provincial officer may make inquiries by telephone or by any other means of communication.

No one knows yet what this means. On the one hand, the new wording avoids the obvious ambiguity of section 163.1(2), the section interpreted in Branch. But this will only force the Divisional Court, next time, to grapple directly with the scope of the Charter protection against self-incrimination.

Since the normal powers of inspectors under, for example, Section 156 of the EPA, don't apply to investigators once they have reasonable and probable grounds to believe that an offence has been committed,, the same limit will presumably apply to the new section. But that Charter protection will be of little comfort to individuals, municipalities, and businesses if they can be forced to confess, in detail, by an inspector, who then hands the resulting statement over to an investigator for use in a prosecution, or for environmental penalties.

Other obvious questions about the new provision include:

  • What inquiries are "reasonable"?
  • How quickly must they be answered?
  • How detailed must the answer be?
  • Must the questions or answers be provided in writing?
  • Are there any circumstances in which an investigator can use the new power?
  • Can the provincial officer demand details of all potential defences to a future charge?
  • Should the person state that the answers are not voluntary, and object to the potential use of these responses against them for enforcement purposes?
  • Should the person state that the provincial officer is forcing them to answer the question before they have been able to complete their investigation, that the answers provided are provisional and may not be correct?
  • Should the person include a claim for confidentiality for the purpose of subsequent freedom of information requests?

The one thing that is clear about the new power is that individuals, municipalities and businesses faced with a demand for information need to consult their lawyer before answering the questions. Once an answer has been given, it may never be possible to take it back.


1. 2001 CanLII 8548 (ON CA)

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Dianne Saxe
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.