Zundel (Re)
June 23, 2004 (2004 FC 798)
Journalist Andrew Mitrovica was subpoenaed to appear as a witness
in Holocaust-denier Ernst Zundel's hearing before the Federal Court.
The hearing was being held pursuant to section 80 of the Immigration
and Refugee Protection Act on the reasonableness of a security certificate
issued by the Ministers against Zundel.
Mitrovica is the author of the book "Covert Entry" -
an exposé on failings within CSIS, based mainly on the revelations
of former CSIS agent, John Farrell. The book devotes a few pages
to Zundel, and describes in particular the fact that CSIS might
have been aware that a bomb was being mailed to Zundel and did nothing
to stop it. In light of this, Zundel served Mitrovica with an extremely
broad subpoena requiring Mitrovica to bring with him all documents,
notes and other materials relating to Zundel, Farrell, CSIS or the
book.
In quashing the subpoena, Justice Blais accepted Mitrovica's arguments
about the importance of protecting confidential sources and cited
the recent R. v. National Post [2004] O.J. No. 178. Justice Blais
reviewed the test for compelling a journalist to testify, as set
out in R v. Hughes [1998] B.C.J. No. 1694, and found that Mitrovica
could not be compelled to testify since he would not have anything
to add, other than hearsay, that was not already in his book.
The key passages in this victory for journalists' rights are as
follows:
[29] . . . Mr. Mitrovica has already disclosed his main source
of information for the book. For other sources, if any, Mr. Mitrovica
could invoke his privilege as a journalist, and it seems to me
he would be entitled to do so. The benefits of having Mr. Mitrovica
testify seem rather doubtful, as against certain harm to the freedom
of the press. Lord Denning, writing in Senior v. Holdsworth, [1975]
2 All ER 1009 (C.A.) stated the case for balancing the need to
know with the need to not hamper the work of journalists
[30] . . . I believe Mr. Mitrovica has little material evidence
to contribute beyond what has already been published. Compelling
him to produce his notes and materials is unduly intrusive, and
given the little probative value that I could attach to such hearsay
materials, I see no need to disturb the journalistic privilege
that attaches to Mr. Mitrovica's evidence.
[31] . . . I believe compelling Mr. Mitrovica to testify is unnecessary.
Mr. Mitrovica has no direct evidence of CSIS activities, only
what has been reported to him, the main source being someone who
obviously, to put it very mildly and judging from the content
of the book, is at odds with CSIS. For this reason, I do not believe
Mr. Mitrovica can provide the Court with relevant evidence.
[32] The last point of the test, whether impairment can be minimized
by limiting the scope of the evidence to be provided, was emphasized
in Mr. Mitrovica's motion as an intermediate solution. However,
for reasons already stated, I fail to see what Mr. Mitrovica can
contribute to these proceedings beyond what is already part of
the public domain through his book.
Justice Blais also quashed subpoenas served by Zundel on two leaders
of the Jewish community and a judge who served as Zundel's lawyer
in 1985.
See Zundel
(Re)
|