Quebec private security law doesn't apply to firms working in federal areas: court
In a unanimous judgment, the top court took issue with aspects of a licensing scheme established by Quebec's Private Security Act that effectively gives a provincial administrative body the final say on security activities that come under an exclusive federal power.
The court found the provincial law is inapplicable to Opsis Airport Services Inc. and Quebec Maritime Services Inc. due to a doctrine, rooted in the Constitution, that protects the core of an exclusive power — either federal or provincial — from being impaired by the other level of government.
Opsis, which runs the emergency call dispatch centre at Pierre Elliott Trudeau International Airport in Montreal, was charged with operating an enterprise that carried on private security activities without an appropriate licence.
Quebec Maritime Services, which performs loading operations on transatlantic ships, and one of the firm's employees were also charged with contravening the Quebec law.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by the companies and the employee, given its finding that the Private Security Act is inapplicable to the activities in question.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 30, 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
19 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Tennessee death row inmate makes last-ditch effort to prevent Aug. 5 execution
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — Attorneys for a Tennessee death row inmate have launched a last-ditch effort to prevent his Aug. 5 execution. In Nashville's Chancery Court, they are asking a judge to require the Tennessee Department of Correction to deactivate an implanted defibrillation device similar to a pacemaker in the moments before Byron Black's execution. If the judge rules in their favor, such an order could potentially delay the execution until the state finds someone willing to do the deactivation. Meanwhile, at the state Supreme Court level, they want judges to order a lower court to consider their claim that Black is incompetent to be executed. The attorneys also have filed a general challenge to the state's new execution protocol, but with a trial scheduled for 2026, any ruling there will come too late for Black. Black was convicted in the 1988 shooting deaths of girlfriend Angela Clay, 29, and her two daughters, Latoya, 9, and Lakeisha, 6. Prosecutors said Black was in a jealous rage when he shot the three at their home. At the time, Black was on work-release while serving time for shooting and wounding Clay's estranged husband. Black has already seen three execution dates come and go, thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic and a pause on all executions from Gov. Bill Lee after the Department of Correction was found to not be testing the execution drugs for potency and purity as required. Black's attorneys have previously tried and failed to show that he should not be executed because he is intellectually disabled, and that would violate the state's Constitution. In a new twist on the same theme, his attorneys now argue that the court should consider Black's competence to be executed under older English common law standards. The state counters that Black does not meet the criteria for incompetency because he understands his conviction, his pending execution, and the relation between the two. Separately, Black's attorneys are asking a different court to rule that his implanted cardioverter-defibrillator must be deactivated just before the execution. They suggest that otherwise the device will continually try to restart his heart, prolonging the execution and causing Black to suffer unnecessarily. Because most medical professionals are unwilling to participate in executions — considering it a violation of medical ethics — it could potentially be time consuming and difficult to find someone willing to deactivate the device in order to kill Black more easily. A hearing on the motion is set for July 14.
Winnipeg Free Press
2 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Lawsuit says Trump's immigration crackdown has put LA ‘under siege' in defiance of federal law
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A federal lawsuit filed Wednesday accuses President Donald Trump's administration of systematically targeting brown-skinned people in Southern California during an ongoingimmigration crackdown that has put the region 'under siege.' The court filing in U.S. District Court alleges that federal agents have violently and indiscriminately arrested people without probable cause while carrying out 'immigration raids flooding street corners, bus stops, parking lots, agricultural sites, day laborer corners.' The lawsuit asks the court to block the Trump administration's 'ongoing pattern and practice of flouting the Constitution and federal law' during actions in and around Los Angeles. 'These guys are popping up, rampant all over the city, just taking people randomly and we want that particular practice to end,' Mohammad Tajsar, an attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, told the Los Angeles Times. In addition, the complaint claims that those arrested are held in 'dungeon-like' conditions without access to lawyers. Tricia McLaughlin, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said in an email that 'any claims that individuals have been 'targeted' by law enforcement because of their skin color are disgusting and categorically FALSE.' McLaughlin said 'enforcement operations are highly targeted, and officers do their due diligence' before making arrests. 'All detainees are provided with proper meals, medical treatment, and have opportunities to communicate with lawyers and their family members,' she said. The complaint centers around three detained immigrants, several immigrant rights groups and two U.S. citizens, one who was held despite showing agents his identification. It comes days after the Trump administration sued Los Angeles to overturn what it called an 'illegal' sanctuary city law. Tens of thousands of people participated in recent rallies over immigration raids and the subsequent deployment of the National Guard and Marines. Los Angeles prosecutors have charged more than 40 people in connection with protest-related violence and vandalism. Among the latest people charged were a man and woman accused of assaulting police horses and a 17-year-old boy who faces felony counts, including attempted murder and assault against an officer. At least 14 people are facing separate federal charges on allegations of assaulting police officers with cinder blocks and Molotov cocktails, and conspiracy to impede arrests.
Winnipeg Free Press
3 days ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Idaho murder case highlights limits of victims' input in plea bargains
The man charged in the stabbing deaths of four University of Idaho students in November 2022 has agreed to plead guilty, according to an attorney for a victim's family, but the family says it opposes any deal that would take the death penalty off the table. Shanon Gray, an attorney for the family of Kaylee Goncalves, said the family has requested that a change of plea hearing for Bryan Kohberger set for Wednesday be delayed so that families could travel to Boise to attend. The family of Ethan Chapin, another of those killed, supports the plea deal, said family spokesperson Christina Teves on Tuesday. Karen and Scott Laramie, the mother and stepfather of Madison Mogen, plan to make a statement through their attorney, Leander James, after the hearing. Relatives of Xana Kernodle did not immediately respond to interview requests. Prosecutors stressed in a letter to victims' families, obtained by ABC News, that they had met with available family members last week before extending the offer. What happens when surviving families of crime victims or victims themselves disagree with prosecutors? Here's a little more on what rights and recourse victims do and don't have in the U.S. and in Idaho. Generally, what rights do crime victims have? A movement to address the needs and well-being of victims of crime started in the 1970s and made grassroots advancements, like the first victims help hotline. Laws addressing the rights of crime victims followed in the '80s, '90s and 2000s, and are relatively new for the criminal justice landscape. The 2004 federal Crime Victims' Rights Act granted eight specific rights to victims in federal criminal cases including the right to be protected from the person accused of committing the crime, the right to reasonable and timely notice of proceedings, the right to restitution and the reasonable right to confer with the prosecution. States were left to pass laws that governed victims' rights for state-level criminal prosecutions. Every state has some form of law addressing the rights of crime victims that vary. Most, at minimum, provide the right to seek restitution or to be informed about court hearings in advance. Many states have passed larger packages sometimes called a victim bill of rights. 'Really, what these laws are designed to do is to make sure that victims are meaningful participants in the architecture of justice,' said Meg Garvin, the executive director of the National Crime Victim Law Institute. What rights are guaranteed in Idaho? Idaho's Constitution outlines 10 rights of crime victims, including to be treated fairly and respectfully, the right to notification of case events and to attend those events, and the right to communicate with prosecutors, among others. It also specifically allows for victims 'to be heard, upon request, at all criminal justice proceedings considering a plea of guilty, sentencing, incarceration or release of the defendant, unless manifest injustice would result.' It was unclear Tuesday if any of the families had requested to make a statement at that hearing, but Garvin said that would be a meaningful opportunity for them to speak to the court. 'When a court decides to accept or reject a plea agreement, it has to be done in the interest of justice,' she said. 'It's a victim's right to have input in the prosecution, but also to make sure the court knows how they feel about a plea. The victims don't have control over the outcome, but they can offer something that helps the court analyze whether the plea is in the interest of justice.' Judges can reject plea agreements in Idaho, but it is a rare occurrence. The judge in Kohberger's case previously denied a defense attorney motion to remove the death penalty from consideration that had argued Kohberger's autism diagnosis made him less culpable. What does the right to confer with prosecutors guarantee? The right to confer covers a broad range of communication with prosecutors, but largely means being kept informed and participating as a case proceeds. That can mean having conversations before a bail hearing to propose conditions of a defendant being released that increase a victim's feeling of safety, or strategizing victim impact statements before sentencing. It does not mean that victims or their families get the final say in how prosecutors try a case or whether they can offer or approve a plea agreement. There is no appeals process for victims or families who disagree with a prosecutor's decision, but that doesn't mean there isn't recourse if a victim believes their rights have been violated. Garvin said not providing an opportunity for meaningful victim input can lead to courts reconsidering sentences or overturning outcomes and holding new hearings. She cited the recent case of Adnan Syed in Maryland, whose murder conviction had been vacated in 2022 after Baltimore prosecutors said they had uncovered issues with the initial prosecution. The victim's family later succeeded in getting the conviction reinstated after challenging the ruling on procedural grounds, arguing they didn't receive proper notice to attend the hearing that freed Syed from prison— a victims' rights violation. In the letter sent to the families of the Idaho victims Monday, prosecutors wrote, 'Your viewpoints weighed heavily in our decision-making process, and we hope that you may come to appreciate why we believe this resolution is in the best interest of justice.' Goncalves' family wrote in Facebook posts that family members had spoken to prosecutors multiple times from Friday to Monday to register their objections to a plea and explain their views about pushing for a conviction at trial and the death penalty. The statement said the Friday discussions were vague, and that the whole process moved incredibly fast despite nearly two years of preparations and waiting for a trial that had been scheduled to start in August.
