The Confessions Rule and the Charter

Resource type
Author/contributor
Title
The Confessions Rule and the Charter
Abstract
The confessions rule—the requirement that the Crown prove the voluntariness of the accused’s statements to persons in authority—is a well-established rule of criminal evidence and is closely connected with the constitutional principle against self-incrimination that it structures. The confessions rule is thus a natural candidate for recognition as a principle of fundamental justice under section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, there are two distinct routes by which the confessions rule might be constitutionalized. Under the “rule of evidence” approach, the confessions rule would be recognized as an aspect of the accused’s constitutional right to a fair trial. Under the “rights violation” approach, the conduct of the state in obtaining an involuntary statement would be treated as a violation of the accused’s constitutional rights.
Publication
McGill Law Journal
Date
2009
Volume
54
Issue
3
Pages
517-546
Journal Abbr
mlj
Accessed
2/21/26, 1:20 AM
ISSN
0024-9041, 1920-6356
Language
en
Library Catalog
www-erudit-org.ledproxy2.uwindsor.ca
Citation
Stewart, H. (2009). The Confessions Rule and the Charter. McGill Law Journal, 54(3), 517–546. https://doi.org/10.7202/038893ar