nerve

Actually no, it is issued in the name of the Queen.. It isthe holders responsibility to protect it from damage, and theft. It may be requested returned. The physical passport is the individuals personal property, but the issue can be revoked, it is lawful to posses invalid passports but not valid to use them fraudulently issued. Government issued ID could be confiscated in limited circumstances, it isn't per se te federal governments property though, no more than your house or car.No it is fully legal to enter and leave Canada at anypoint. No passport is required. Any law that infringes that is unconstitutional. I have been told by passport Canada multiple times of that fact and even recommended to travel that way by them. There is no illegality whatsoever to travel without a passport. Airlines have their own responsibilities based on transport Canada provisions, however the individual is not bound to those regulations. There are bilateral contexts however which make travel impractical without one though, for instance you have only limited entry options based on US law, has nothing to do with Canadian law, such as needing to report to a border point and it would require filling out forms, medical or other emergency matters. In general the idea is they want you to be IDed so they can determine admisability. http://vancouver.24hrs.ca/2012/10/30/canadaus-border-not-totally-impassable-without-passport

Not anything.xraying cannot be conducted without consent on people. Certain items can be destroyed by xrays. Per Wilson J.: The constitutionality of appellant's strip search cannot be determined solely on the basis of whether there has been compliance with ss. 143 and 144 of the Customs Act . These statutory provisions must be read in accord with the obligation under s. 10 ( of the Charter to inform those who are detained of their right to retain and instruct counsel and to respect that right. Any limit on the constitutionally guaranteed right to counsel, if it is to be valid under s. 1 of the Charter , has to be "prescribed by law". Sections 143 and 144 have to be examined to see whether a limit is provided for expressly or by necessary implication or through the operating requirements of the sections: see R. v. Therens, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 613, and R. v. Thomsen, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 640. There is nothing in ss. 143 and 144 which is incompatible with the right to counsel, nor do their operating requirements preclude such a right. Therefore, the violation of appellant's s. 10 ( rights prior to the search renders the search unconstitutional given the complete compatibility of the authorizing statutory search provisions with the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay which is guaranteed in the Constitution. An unconstitutional search cannot be a reasonable one. Point being counsel should have occurred before arrest, as one the guy was detained and 2. They had to inform him of his right to counsel Else the search was unconstitutional thus an unreasonable search. R. v. Singh [2007] 3 S.C.R. 405: In Singh, the Supreme Court of Canada held that the right to silence applies any time that an individual interacts with a person in authority. Passengers selected for additional screening, can choose to pass through the FBS (where available) or to undergo a physical search (see previous section.) What you should know: Physical searches can be conducted at the screening line or in a private search room. Passengers may ask that the pat-down be conducted in a private search room. CATSA is obliged to provide a room or curtained-off area for this purpose. When conducted in a private search room, two Screening Officers of the same gender as the passenger must be present. One will conduct the search and the other serves as a witness. If you or your belongings are selected for additional screening, you may request that the Screening Officers wear gloves Passengers may request a hand search at pre-board screening to avoid potential damage to film). For more details visit the CATSA website

Although the court has ruled that an officer can hold on to that person's phone and try to crack the security code, an individual has no obligation to give police a cellphone password, under the charter right to silence.If non routine search that is an invasive search I don't got to do nothing. I have the option of calling counsel. Other than that they got to take care of all my needs. It is charter right to enter and leave Canada. No law broken I walk away after they waste time and tax dollars. Obstruction is an act not a non act. My assistance is non interference in the search. As soon as possible I must be brought before a JP

That is RCMP not customs. RCMP should get a warrant.Customs cant search people for criminal evidence, they can search for customs violations. There is a reason search warrants are required. How the hell would customs have suspicion a person returning to Canada is a led unless they mile high with an not so high partner on the return flight. Customs searches arnt suppose to be arbitrary. Customs ain't cops they are customs. http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/security-securite/arr-det-eng.html Arrests: How and why CBSA officers can arrest foreign nationals and permanent residents who are suspected of breaching IRPA. CBSA officers must have a warrant to arrest a permanent resident or a person who is found to be in need of Canada's protection. CBSA may arrest a foreign national with or without a warrant. All immigration warrants are entered into the Canada-wide Canadian Police Information Centre database. The CBSA operates its own Warrant Response Centre seven days a week, 24 hours a day, to carry out its immigration enforcement mandate. Detentions: How and why Following a person's arrest, CBSA officers can detain that person if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the person is inadmissible for any of the following reasons: the person is unlikely to appear for an immigration proceeding such as an examination or an admissibility hearing, or for removal from Canada; the person is a danger to the public; or the person is unable to satisfy the officer of their identity; or the person is designated as part of an irregular arrival by the Minister of Public Safety. Detention at port of entry CBSA officers at a port of entry can detain someone for reasons other than those listed above. Officers can also detain a permanent resident or a foreign national at a port of entry for the following reasons: It is necessary for the completion of an examination; or There are reasonable grounds to suspect that the person is inadmissible on grounds of security, violating human or international rights, serious criminality, criminality, or organized criminality. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms Whenever an individual is arrested or detained, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms requires that a CBSA officer inform the individual of the reasons for their arrest or detention, their right to legal representation and their right to notify a representative of their government that they have been arrested or detained. My point is that he should have been provide counsel prior to the demand to provide the device password as there was a reasonable expectation of privacy in regard to the storage device, as such he was detained and should have has counsel before the point of arrest occurred. He was not provide legal advice in regard to the situation by counsel.

I disagree everything in my life has been God's gift and I again give thanks for a wonderful day, that could have been much worse. Wealth is a relative value. Is gold a more effective provider than 3000 calories a day or a gun to your head? It is all voodoo it is just what it does to you, it could be anything. Printing money and giving it to non earners is better monetary policy for the poor. At the end of the day money or gold dont matter though. It is relative.

It makes perfect sense to print before taxing, it actually makes sense to print and not tax. People who are rich like their money to hold value though, so they prefer unequal dilution of wealth to favour their own monetary strength. The other side is that capital as well as currency are taxable so some measure of capital taxation might still be required. Bottom line is corporatism and selling out egalitarianism so money retains value over time, this really isn't the case with Canada as a petrodollar anyway. It all boils down to who government wants to rape, and it is far easier to take defensless disempowered lumpen than elites and affluents. Savers want mobility, they don't want to dream how banal and pointless their life will be by prepurchasing their future now. Yes it his selling out the public to the wealthy, surprise surprise. The idea is to reward capable managers. Neo liberalism is only as bad as the poor ethical values as the elites who control ownership of global capital. We all die. If we are rewarding capable managers it makes perfect sense the government is in perpetual debt.

The exception is diplomats.

Nah bag searches are considered routine.

What goods are you hiding in the data of a cellphone?Sure there may be a bus in there but it is what carries the data not the other way around. What is he acting as a coyote for pigmy illegals or something? The halluciongenic effect of occulus rift has been put on schedule I or something. No it must just be the scratch and sniff sticker on the case giving the Wiener doggy a false positive, sure he is clawing at the thing but its probably only episodes of Alf I was playing waiting in line. No officer there is no cocaine in my gmail. Yes I am just happy to see you, oh that, no really. Yes my phone is there to insure no one walks into it except my boyfriend. Are you sure you want to hold it? Well I know there are only 50 people waiting behind me, but do you want to see senior frogs and cocobongo pictures... yes and hooters too right, and the 5$ heroine addicted transvestite that robbed me, right up until I caught it dangling. _------- What does it have to do with stopping smuggling of goods?

But only because they don't follow the law and it is a farce. I have nothing to hide.I dont use a cell. Good luck getting useful info out of my Globalstar1600 sat phone.

Privacy is a fundamental right where privacy is expected. Everyone has a degree of expectation to non invasive interaction. "men and institutions remain free only when freedom is founded upon respect for moral and spiritual values" Ex. Do not open up a tent which is not yours because it brings shame. If government arbitrarily acts against people that others cannot it is a violation of morality, and unconstitutional. Privacy is included as security of person and liberty. Our information is our property and protected from search and seizure. The act of search entails privacy as a right. The act of search where privacy is a reasonable expectation should create a state of detainment which invokes right to counsel. Blanket violations are not acceptable. the right protecting the "psychological integrity" of an individual. That is, the right protects against significant government-inflicted harm (stress) to the mental state of the individual. (Blencoe v. B.C. (Human Rights Commission), 2000)

In other words I told you four places.

It all comes down to weather searching someone's smartphone/storage device is routine or extensive.http://en.m.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Procedure_and_Practice/Search_and_Seizure/Print_version Factors Factors considered in R. v. Edwards[1]: A reasonable expectation of privacy is to be determined on the basis of the totality of the circumstances.[2] The factors to be considered in assessing the totality of the circumstances may include, but are not restricted to, the following: presence at the time of the search; possession or control of the property or place searched; ownership of the property or place; historical use of the property or item; the ability to regulate access, including the right to admit or exclude others from the place; the existence of a subjective expectation of privacy; and Regulated access is the key, it was not open or public and intentionally protected, meaning an expectation of confidentiality. Computers and Electronic Devices Home and personal computers are imbued with a high degree of privacy due to the frequency that it contains intimate correspondence, financial, medical, or personal information. In addition to our personal interests and tastes.[1] According to the Morelli court, the level of privacy does not get much higher.[2] He should have been given access to counsel before demands were made or arrest occurred, as he was detained. Memory Sticks In R. v. Tuduce, 2011 ONSC 2749, the court said that a search of a memory stick has a REP and so requires a search warrant.[1]

Privacy is a fundamental right where privacy is expected. Everyone has a degree of expectation to non invasive interaction."men and institutions remain free only when freedom is founded upon respect for moral and spiritual values" Ex. Do not open up a tent which is not yours because it brings shame. If government arbitrarily acts against people that others cannot it is a violation of morality, and unconstitutional. Privacy is included as security of person and liberty. Our information is our property and protected from search and seizure. The act of search entails privacy as a right. The act of search where privacy is a reasonable expectation should create a state of detainment which invokes right to counsel. Blanket violations are not acceptable. the right protecting the "psychological integrity" of an individual. That is, the right protects against significant government-inflicted harm (stress) to the mental state of the individual. (Blencoe v. B.C. (Human Rights Commission), 2000)

What I don't get, is how do you draw the line if it isn't incitement, counseling an offense, hate speech, criminal harassment or criminal libel? Wouldn't this already be in the criminal code? If it wasn't criminal before, why can the government limit the conscience, thought belief provisions of the charter? It seems unconstitutional and actually in itself criminal harassment, fraud, and probably a few other crimes.

Import is not return of an object that originated in Canada. None the less the law was made before portable devices were around carrying the amount and type of data they are. The court has already ruled on the issue though, regardless if it is a personal invasion on confidential, and private matters, it is a very extensive invasion for many people who use their cell phone as a personal assistant of sorts. None the less, the requirement to provide information would appear to be a type of detainment, and in that case under the charter, the person is suppose to be provided access to counsel prior to any questions, and I would suppose any non emergency orders were asked. If detained doesn't someone in Canada have right to counsel prior to being questioned? "The Supreme Court of Canada has said that routine questioning or luggage searching by a customs official at a border crossing is not a “detention”, but if you are taken aside and required to submit to extensive searching and you cannot leave, you have been detained, and your right to counsel is triggered." http://bccla.org/privacy-handbook/main-menu/privacy6contents/privacy6-8/ Thus it was a violation of his charter rights to require to provide the password without counsel being provided. (3) Simmons v. R., 1988 CanLII 12 (S.C.C.) , 1988 CanLII 12 (S.C.C.), 1988 CanLII 12 (S.C.C.) , [1988] 2 S.C.R. 495; Jacoy v. R., 1988 CanLII 13 (S.C.C.) , 1988 CanLII 13 (S.C.C.), 1988 CanLII 13 (S.CC.) , [1988] 2 S.C.R. 548. ​I would equate this to the need for a strip search and medical exam, and interrogation to providing unhindered access to your smart-phone, as they often contain extensive and private information including nude photos. Once being asked to provide unhindered access to your smart phone and not being able to leave, this should be considered detainment, it is not and never should be considered a routine search. The reason for the search in this case is unknown, in the other it was because the RCMP requested the search because they didn't have a warrant for a standard police search due to charter protections, their request was refused by the J.P.. It is being used to circumvent judicial protections against the police, essentially the way it is being exercised is a corruption. Why can the police not search but CBP search on request of police, it is clearly a corruption.

That comment is utterly offensive. I have a universal human right called mobility. There is a constitutional right allowing exit and entry from Canada.Sure border guards can waste a hell of a lot of you time delays connections jail you for extended periods without even breaking a law, but no hell no never surrender your rights or limit your legal activities. They are the ones going to hell at the end if the day for victimizing people. There is a line between good civil conduct and abuse. But no don't stop exercising your rights, that is the way everyone looses their rights. Unfortunately the wolrd is a ...... Place where good people get abused but never accept that abuse. Life is short enjoy it. IMO he was in Canada a search warrant was required to access info. Issue is blanket warrants. Gov is a police state that doesn't respect civil and human rights its that simple, big surprise. The courts are corrupt too. Selfish bastards don't start caring until it is their car cut into pieces on a suspicion. What's that its not even a tax write off? There is no public password it Is Art officer? No this one is mine go to the apple store? What 799 plus another 3000 for my nude photos of my peepee And we have a deal. Do I know you? View the gov as worse than nazis and soviets circa 1952 and you will be prepared for dealings with them. It is all whim. http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2012/2012onsc6794/2012onsc6794.html

People are entitled to their views. We cannot discount sacrificing would suicides to have heroes of medicine and hope for the future for all. Why have conflict when honour and self sacrifice could be in its place?http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/10774097/Breakthrough-in-human-cloning-offers-new-transplant-hope.html 1in 4 us pregnancies end in miscarriage yet we are holding back life saving medicine to prevent unborn babies from getting life, or dying humans a second chance at life. Shameful. Shame on the selfish bastards holding back the cure. Over 100 million women let their eggs rot month the after month over 100 million potential embryos to go down the drain or into a pad, that would be 10 billion stem cells each month just from taping us birth control pill users. It is not that clear cut but the bottom line is society is choosing to kill instead of give life. That is a shame.

It is genocide and racism. Officials should be ashamed for fashion policing. They should go back to hell and let a tolerant nonsectarian society form where people have the freedom of expression. Courts in Canada are a sham regardless. Thugs and liars. Get the cultural supremicists out of all officiating roles. Enforce the charter in court function! It is hypocracy. All government should be bound to the charter. There is no reason why Catholics must be genocidal.

Yeah and there have been tons. Read the links. I know you didn't do the research. Your position is showing how badly you are at it. Pop quiz when was the first monkey head transplant? Where did it occur? How long did it live? Why did it die?

Look at the time stamps, he didn't read 40 plus webpages in that time, it is common sense.

Wow. So what exactly do they do?

That is a lie. Either that or you need more grey matter injected to improve your recall. Something like this http://gladstoneinstitutes.org/pressrelease/2014-07-15/transplantation-of-healthy-new-brain-cells-reverses-learning-and-memory-loss

However if your safety deposit box was required for business such as storing backup corporate documents it would be an operating cost. This is why taxes on income are stupid. People should just pay for fees for services they want from the government.

it is remarkable the scc struck this down while a judge in Quebec refused to hear a plaintiffs case to get her repoed car back until she removed her headscarf cause hats and sunglasses arnt allowed... judges are so bloody anal and unreasonable