Does a judge have the same powers as a justice conducting a preliminary inquiry under Part XVIII of the Criminal Code?

The extradition hearing is to be conducted like a preliminary inquiry under domestic law. Despite the fact that the judge is a member of a provincial superior court, she or he has the same powers as a “justice” has conducting a preliminary inquiry under Part XVIII of the Criminal Code, subject to anything included in the Extradition Act itself. See Extradition Act, s. 24(2). See also, United States of America v. Dynar, supra, at pp. 520-1 C.C.C. per Cory and Iacobucci JJ. Under the current state of the law, a justice conducting a preliminary inquiry may rule on issues of admissibility, but may not exclude evidence because of constitutional infringement, or grant Charter relief under s. 24(1). See, for example, Republic of Argentina v. Mellino, supra, at pp. 349-50 C.C.C., per La Forest J.

There can be no doubt that the Charter applies to extradition proceedings. Amongst other things, it guarantees fairness in the extradition hearing, its compliance with the principles of fundamental justice. But it is also clear that the principles of fundamental justice vary according to the context of the proceedings in which they are raised. See, United States of America v. Dynar, supra, p. 523 C.C.C., per Cory and Iacobucci JJ.