Annual Report on the Use of Electronic Surveillance - 2024
Public Safety Canada

Table of contents

Introduction

Part VI of the Criminal Code sets out the provisions for the law enforcement community to obtain judicial authorization to conduct electronic surveillance of private communications for criminal investigations. This section also sets out provisions to conduct electronic surveillance of private communications without judicial authorization when there is imminent harm, such as in the case of kidnappings or bomb threats. These procedures are to be carried out in such a way so as to ensure that the privacy of individuals is respected as much as possible during the surveillance.

As a measure of accountability, section 195 of the Criminal Code requires the Minister of Public Safety to prepare and present to Parliament an annual report on the use of electronic surveillance under Part VI for offences that may be prosecuted by, or on behalf of, the Attorney General of Canada.

The 2024 Annual Report covers a five-year period from 2020 to 2024. The Report includes new statistics for the period from January 1, 2024 to December 31, 2024 and updated figures for the years 2020 to 2023.

The Annual Report must include the following information:

On September 27, 2013, additional accountability measures were implemented for section 184.4 of the Criminal Code (Immediate interception – imminent harm) which resulted in changes to section 195 (Annual Report). Some of the required information is the same as for section 185 and section 186; however, there are also new requirements specifically for section 184.4.

The Annual Report must also include information specifically for section 184.4 such as:

The 2024 Annual Report is organized in the following manner:

Section I – Overview of Part VI of the Criminal Code

Part VI of the Criminal Code sets out the provisions for the law enforcement community to obtain judicial authorization to conduct electronic surveillance for criminal investigations.

Only designated peace officers and agents can obtain this authorization to intercept private communications, and only for certain serious offences, which are listed in section 183 of the Criminal Code (e.g., facilitating terrorist activity, weapons trafficking, drug trafficking, and organized crime offences).

Part VI also sets out the requirements that must be met to apply for and obtain authorization to intercept private communications. These requirements include the following:

Generally, authorizations are not issued for a period longer than 60 days (paragraph 186(4)(e)). Designated persons may apply to a judge to have the authorization renewed, which extends the time during which they can lawfully conduct electronic surveillance. Before the judge may renew the authorization, he or she must be satisfied that the same circumstances that applied to the original application for authorization still apply (subsections 186(6) and 186(7)).

Provisions also permit designated persons to obtain judicial authorization to intercept private communications in emergency situations. Under section 188 of the Criminal Code, a peace officer designated by the Minister of Public Safety may apply to a judge for an authorization if the urgency of the situation requires interception of private communications, but there is not enough time to use the regular application process to obtain an authorization. An authorization considered in these circumstances may be issued for a period of up to 36 hours, and the judge may impose terms and conditions.

In addition to applying for an authorization to intercept private communications under Part VI, peace officers and agents may apply to a judge for a general warrant under section 487.01 of the Criminal Code. This section enables the issuance of a warrant for the use of any device or investigative technique that is not contemplated elsewhere in the Criminal Code or any other Act of Parliament. For example, this type of warrant would allow peace officers to carry out video surveillance of a person in circumstances where the person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. As with other judicial authorizations, certain requirements must be met before a warrant can be issued. In the case of warrants issued pursuant to section 487.01, these requirements include the following:

In 1993, Parliament enacted section 184.4 (Immediate interception – imminent harm) of the Criminal Code to allow the use of wiretapping without a court authorization when there is imminent harm, such as in the case of kidnappings or bomb threats. In R. v. Tse, the Supreme Court of Canada found that a wiretap authority without a court authorization in situations of imminent harm could be justified under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. However, the Supreme Court declared that section 184.4 was unconstitutional because it contained no accountability measures. The Supreme Court gave Parliament until April 13, 2013, to amend the provision to make it constitutionally compliant. On March 27, 2013, legislation responding to R v. Tse received Royal Assent, adding accountability safeguards to the existing provision for wiretaps in situations of imminent harm under the Criminal Code.

In 2022, Public Safety and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) appeared before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics to answer questions related to device investigative tools used by the RCMP. A commitment was made to this Committee by the RCMP to make available for transparency purposes the RCMP's data on the use of the On-Device Investigative Tools (ODITs). This data will now be included in Table 7, beginning in the 2024 report.

Section II – Statistics

It should be noted that the numbers reported in this section may increase in future years to reflect updated statistics from Canadian police forces.

Applications for authorizations and renewals

Paragraphs 195(2)(a) and (b) of the Criminal Code require statistics relating to:

The table below presents the number of applications made for audio and video authorizations and renewals each year for the five-year period from 2020 to 2024. The data is categorized by the five types of applications for which authorizations may be granted: audio and video applications (maximum duration sixty days) and renewals thereof pursuant to subsections 185(1) and 186(6) and section 487.01 of the Criminal Code, as well as emergency applications (maximum duration 36 hours) pursuant to subsection 188(1) and section 487.01 of the Criminal Code.

Table 1 – The table below outlines the number of applications made authorizations, or for renewal of authorizations
Type of Application Number of Applications
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Audio s. 185 C.C. 51 54 46 48 35
Video s. 487.01 C.C. 43 45 39 31 34
Renewals s. 186 C.C. 3 2 0 9 1
Emergency audio s. 188 C.C. 0 0 0 1 1
Emergency video s. 487.01 C.C. 0 0 0 0 0
Total 97 101 85 89 71

Paragraph 195(2)(c) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

Table 2 – The table below outlines the number of applications made with terms and conditions, without terms and conditions and those refused
Terms and Conditions or Refusal Number of Applications
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
With terms and conditions 97 101 83 89 70
Without terms and conditions 0 0 0 0 0
Refusal 0 0 2 0 1

Period for which authorizations and renewals were granted

Paragraph 195(2)(f) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

The calculations below represent the "average period of time valid" for authorizations and renewals where applicable. Further, it is important to note that although authorizations originally granted or renewed may be valid for a period of up to 60 days and emergency audio and video authorizations up to 36 hours, this does not necessarily mean interceptions are made during the entire period. For example, sufficient evidence may be obtained as a result of the authorization to prove the offence and to lay charges prior to the expiration of the authorization. It is also important to note that some authorizations investigating organized crime may be valid for up to one year, which increases the authorizations' overall average period of validity.

Table 3 – The table below outlines the average period of time the authorizations and renewals were valid
Type of Authorization Average Period of Time Valid
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Audio s. 185 C.C. (days) 66.9 62.8 64.5 39.7 59.2
Video s. 487.01 C.C. (days) 63.5 67.0 65.2 83.7 68.9
Emergency audio s. 188 C.C. (hours) 0 0 0 36 24
Emergency video s. 487.01 C.C. (hours) 0 0 0 0 0

Paragraph 195(2)(g) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

The categories in the table below representing renewals are mutually exclusive. For example, an authorization valid for a period of 60 days which was renewed for a further 60 days is counted in the category 61-120 days, and an authorization of 60 days coupled with 3 X 60 day renewals would be counted in the 181-240 category.

Table 4 – The table below outlines the number of authorizations valid for more than 60, 120, 180 and 240 days
Renewal Period (days) Number of Authorizations Renewed
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
61-120 4 0 1 5 3
121-180 0 0 1 0 1
181-240 0 0 0 0 0
241 or more 0 1 0 0 0

Offences specified in authorizations

Paragraph 195(2)(i) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

Most authorizations granted to agents by the Minister of Public Safety provide for the use of electronic surveillance in relation to more than one offence. A typical example of such an authorization would be in relation to sections 5 (trafficking), 6 (importing and exporting), and 7 (production) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and conspiracy under section 465 of the Criminal Code to commit these offences. The table below represents the number of times specific offences were identified in authorizations granted to agents by the Minister of Public Safety. For example, of the 71 applications for authorizations granted in 2024, 29 of these authorizations specifically provided for the use of electronic surveillance in connection with drug trafficking, 33 for possession for the purpose of trafficking and 13 for importing and exporting.

Table 5 – The table below outlines the types of offences for which authorizations were granted
Statute Type of Offence Number of Authorizations
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Cannabis Act Distribution ss. 9(1) 3 8 11 0 0
Possession for the purpose of distributing ss. 9(2) 3 0 0 1 0
Selling & Possession for the purpose of selling ss. 10(1) 3 1 13 2 0
Possession for the purpose of selling ss. 10(2) 3 5 0 1 0
Importing and exporting ss. 11(1) 1 0 9 2 0
Production par. 12(1)(a) 0 1 9 2 0
Possession etc. for use in production of distribution of illicit cannabis s. 13 0 0 9 2 0
Competition Act Bid-rigging s. 47 0 4 0 0 0
Controlled Drugs and Substances Act Trafficking in a narcotic ss. 5(1) 58 63 47 32 29
Possession for the purpose of trafficking ss. 5(2) 52 65 37 29 33
Importing and exporting ss. 6(1) 15 28 24 9 13
Possession for the purpose of exporting ss. 6(2) 0 0 0 0 2
Production s. 7 0 4 2 3 2
Criminal Code Using Explosives s. 81(1) 0 2 0 0 0
Providing or collecting property for certain activities s. 83.02 0 1 0 0 0
Providing, making available, etc. property or services for terrorist activities s. 83.03 0 0 0 4 4
Participation in the activity of a terrorist group s. 83.18(1) 10 3 8 3 1
Facilitating terrorist activities s. 83.19 0 1 6 1 0
Commission of an offense for a terrorist group s. 83.2 4 0 2 0 0
Leave Canada to commit an offence for a terrorist group s. 83.201 0 0 0 0 1
Leave Canada to commit an offence that is a terrorist activity s. 83.202 0 1 2 0 0
Advocating or promoting the commission of terrorism offences s. 83.221 0 0 0 2 0
Possession of weapon for dangerous purpose s.88 1 0 0 0 0
Possession of prohibited or restricted firearm with ammunition s. 95 1 0 0 0 1
Weapons trafficking s. 99 2 1 2 0 7
Possession for the purpose of weapons smuggling s.100 1 0 0 0 3
Bribery s. 120 0 0 2 0 0
Breach of trust by Public Officer s. 122 1 0 2 1 2
Obstructing Justice s.139.1 0 0 0 0 2
Indignity to a dead human body ss.182(b) 0 0 0 0 1
Keeping gamine or betting house ss.201(1) 0 0 0 0 1
Murder s. 235 9 10 6 9 5
Manslaughter s. 236 2 0 0 0 1
Attempt to Commit Murder s. 239 0 0 1 0 1
Accessory after the fact s. 240 0 0 1 0 0
Discharging firearm with intent s. 244 1 2 0 0 0
Uttering threats s.264.1 0 2 0 0 0
Aggravated Assault s. 268 0 0 0 2 0
Motor Vehicle Theft s. 333.1 0 0 0 1 0
Punishment for Theft s. 334 0 0 0 0 1
Unauthorized use of a computer s. 342.1 0 0 0 1 0
Break and enter s. 348 0 0 1 0 0
Selling, etc., automobile mater key s. 353.1 0 0 0 0 1
Possession of property obtained by crime s. 354 23 34 29 17 21
Possession of proceeds of crime contrary s. 354(1)(b) 0 7 3 4 4
Possession of property obtained by the commission of an offence s. 355 3 9 0 0 1
Trafficking in property obtained by crime s. 355.2 3 1 0 1 7
Possession of property obtained by crime – trafficking s. 355.4 2 2 2 0 2
Fraud s. 380 0 4 3 0 4
Explosives or other lethal device par. 431.2(2) 0 2 0 0 0
Arson for fraudulent purposes s. 435 0 1 1 0 0
Possession of incendiary material s. 436.1 0 3 5 0 0
Uttering, etc., counterfeit money s. 452 1 0 0 0 0
Laundering proceeds of counterfeit money s. 462.31 23 14 23 12 16
Attempts, accessories s. 463 3 13 19 13 5
Counselling s. 464 3 18 16 8 3
Conspiracy s. 465 51 68 45 29 33
Participating in activities of a criminal organization s. 467.11 7 12 4 6 0
Recruitment of members by a criminal organization s. 467.111 5 0 2 3 0
Commission of an offence for a criminal organization s. 467.12 8 9 0 9 6
Instructing commission of an offence for a criminal organization s. 467.13 1 2 0 5 4
Customs Act Smuggling – into Canada ss. 59(1) 0 0 5 0 0
Excise Act Unlawful possession or sale of improperly packaged tobacco ss. 32(1) 3 0 0 0 3
Unlawful production, sale, etc. of tobacco or alcohol s. 214 3 0 0 0 0
Unlawful possession of tobacco product s. 216 4 0 4 0 2
Possession of property obtained by excise offenses s. 230 3 0 0 0 0

Classes of places and methods of interception

Paragraph 195(2)(j) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

Table 6 – The table below outlines a description of the classes of places set out in authorizations, and the number of authorizations granted for each class of place
Class of Place Number of Authorizations
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Residence (permanent) 25 28 17 16 17
Residence (temporary) 8 6 8 6 2
Commercial Premises 7 13 4 6 7
Vehicles 24 34 21 38 17
Other 17 64 62 63 36

Paragraph 195(2)(k) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

Table 7 – The table below outlines a general description of the methods of interception used
Method of Interception

Number of Interceptions

2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Telecommunication 392 403 204 197 212
Microphone 93 146 73 72 71
Video 68 81 59 69 54
Other 22 68 74 40 46
ODITs (On-Device Investigative Tools) 9 9 10 6 1

Legal proceedings, use of intercepted material and disposition

Paragraph 195(2)(l) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

Table 8 – The table below outlines the number of people arrested whose identity became known due to an interception under an authorization
Year 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Number of Persons Arrested 74 32 51 26 32

Paragraph 195(2)(d) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

The table below contains information relating to the number of persons charged for all types of offences, including Criminal Code offences. Moreover, the three categories of offences are not treated as being mutually exclusive, and persons charged with more than one category of offence are counted more than once. Therefore, one cannot add the columns in this table to obtain the total number of persons against whom proceedings were commenced.

Table 9 – The table below outlines the number of persons identified in an authorization who were charged for various offences
Category of Offence Number of Persons Against Whom Proceedings were Commenced (identified in authorization)
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Offence specified in authorization 155 184 102 971 67
Offence for which an authorization may be given but not specified in the authorization 59 53 15 45 22
Offence for which no authorization may be given 25 24 2 5 7

Tables 9 and 10 are interrelated. Table 9 provides information on the number of persons identified in an authorization who were charged with specific categories of offences, e.g., an offence specified in the authorization, an offence other than an offence specified in such an authorization but in respect to which an authorization may be given, or an offence other than an offence specified in such an authorization and for which no such authorization may be given. The subsequent table in this report provides similar information on persons not identified in an authorization, but who were charged as a result of information from the authorized interception.

Paragraph 195(2)(e) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

The table below contains information relating to the number of persons charged for all types of offences, including Criminal Code offences. Moreover, the three categories of offences are not treated as being mutually exclusive, and persons charged with more than one category of offence are counted more than once. Therefore, one cannot add the columns in this table to obtain the total number of persons against whom proceedings were commenced.

Table 10 - The table below outlines the number of persons not identified in an authorization but who were charged for various offences
Category of Offence Number of Persons Against Whom Proceedings were Commenced (not identified in authorization)
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Offence specified in authorization 58 68 45 34 46
Offence for which an authorization may be given but not specified in the authorization 25 33 4 21 10
Offence for which no authorization may be given 7 7 0 2 23

Again, Tables 9 and 10 are interrelated. The former table provides information on the number of persons identified in an authorization who were charged with specific categories of offences, e.g., an offence specified in the authorization, an offence other than an offence specified in such an authorization but in respect to which an authorization may be given, or an offence other than

an offence specified in such an authorization and for which no such authorization may be given. The latter table provides similar information on persons not identified in an authorization, but who were charged as a result of information obtained from the authorized interception.

Paragraph 195(2)(m) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

Table 11 - The table below outlines the number of proceedings in which intercepted communications were entered as evidence and the number of those proceedings that resulted in a conviction
Evidence adduced Number of Criminal Proceedings
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Criminal proceedings 714 653 614 157 341
Convictions 212 67 70 1 3

Paragraph 195(2)(n) of the Criminal Code requires information relating to:

Table 12 - The table below outlines the number of investigations in which information from intercepted communications was used but the communication itself was not entered as evidence
Evidence not adduced Number of Criminal Investigations
2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Criminal investigations 79 22 112 46 90
Convictions 48 11 0 4 0

Notifications

Pursuant to subsection 196(1) of the Criminal Code, the Minister of Public Safety is required to notify in writing the person who was the object of the interception. Furthermore, paragraph 195(2)(h) requires that the Annual Report of the Minister of Public Safety:

Notice is served on those persons whose communications were intercepted, and who were identified in the authorization, either by name, or unnamed but known (e.g., the unidentified female living with John Doe). In cases where the person was identified but unnamed in the authorization, notification is to be served on such persons where sufficient information is acquired to effect notification. Notification may be delayed by a judge for up to three years if the investigation is continuing, is in relation to a terrorism offence or an offence associated with a criminal organization, and the judge is of the opinion that the extension would be in the interest of justice.

Table 13 - The table below outlines the number of notifications given to people who had private communications intercepted
Year 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Number of Notifications 733 909 923 557 595

Prosecutions for unlawful interceptions and unlawful disclosure

Paragraph 195(3)(a) of the Criminal Code requires that the Annual Report provide information relating to:

No such prosecutions have been initiated for the period of 2020 to 2024.

Subsection 184(1) of the Criminal Code, with a number of specific exceptions, makes it an offence for a person to wilfully intercept a private communication by means of an electromagnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device. Subsection 193(1), with similar specific exceptions, makes it an offence to disclose a private communication that was lawfully intercepted, or to disclose the existence of such intercepted communications.

Section III – Statistics for Section 184.4 (Immediate Interception – Imminent Harm)

Paragraph 195(1)(c) of the Criminal Code requires that the Annual Report provide information relating to interceptions without judicial authorization under section 184.4 (Immediate interception – imminent harm).

On September 27, 2013, additional accountability measures were implemented for section 184.4 which resulted in changes to section 195 (Annual Report). The list of reporting requirements for section 184.4 can be found in the beginning of the Report under Introduction.

No such interceptions were initiated for the period therefore; there are no statistics to report under this section.

Section IV General assessment

Paragraph 195(3)(b) of the Criminal Code requires that the Annual Report provide:

Investigation

The lawful interception of private communications is a vital tool used by law enforcement agencies. It is of great assistance to complex criminal investigations involving threats to national security and serious crimes. The statistics presented in Section III of this report indicate that the majority of authorizations issued are in relation to the offence of trafficking in a controlled substance.

Detection

The illegal activities of organized criminal groups and terrorist activity, just to name a few, would remain largely undetected were it not for the active investigation of the police. Offences such as money laundering, smuggling, drug trafficking or participation in the activity of a terrorist group, present serious threats to the safety and stability of Canadian communities, and the lawful interception of private communications provides a crucial means for the police to investigate the commission of such offences.

Prevention

The use of electronic surveillance in investigations has led to numerous drug seizures, leading to a reduction in the amount of illicit drugs and crime associated with their abuse. Without this crucial tool, the ability of the law enforcement community to prevent crimes and ensuing social harm would be seriously hindered.

Prosecution

Investigations of the activities of organized crime groups are increasingly complex and sometimes criminal charges are difficult to prove in a court of law. The use of electronic surveillance often provides strong evidence against those accused of being involved in illegal activities, increasing the likelihood of conviction. The prosecution of such offenders increases public confidence in the criminal justice system and contributes to public safety by holding such persons responsible for their actions.

Date modified: