CANADA BACKGROUND CHECK

We are working as the team of some of the sophisticated background screeners to take up risk managements in Canada to control risk through cons and cheats where the all type of credential, testimonial or documents are at stake due to huge deceptions and alteration of information through faked medium. The wider protection against such risk in verifications can be obtained by taking the effective background verifications in Canada. Our services are instrumental in saving the tarnished image of corporate by regaining the same by brining the credibility of the entire records. The intelligent use of our Background verification services in Canada could provide the most appealing environment by maintaining the reliance in records and credentials at all the times.

Our background verification services in Canada will instill an effective environment free from all encumbrances to support the companies to have the optimistic approach in getting the impressive verifications. We have spreads out in all the region of Canada Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, Calgary, Ottawa, Edmonton, Hamilton, Quebec City, Winnipeg, Mississauga, Kitchener, London, Windsor, Markham and Victoria to offer our extensive services.

For further clarification on Verification, kindly visit our website info@backcheckgroup.com for right answer.

General Information
 

GDP

  

USD1,830 bn (World ranking 11, World Bank 2013)
Population 35.2 mn (World ranking 37, World Bank 2013)
Form of state Federal Parliamentary (Constitutional Monarchy)
Head of government Steven HARPER (CON)
Next elections 2015 federal, legislative, provincial

CURRENT LOCAL TIME

FILL TO DOWNLOAD SAMPLE REPORT

*Note: This is just a sample report. It may change according to your requirements and country

PRODUCTS IN CANADA

Data Protection

Canada

Contribution Details

Heenan Blaikie LLP

offices: Montreal * Toronto * Vancouver * Quebec * Calgary Sherbrooke * ottawa * Trios-reveries * Victoria * Paris * Singapore
Adam Kardash
Partner

Law

In Canada there are 27 federal, provincial and territorial privacy statutes (excluding statutory torts, privacy requirements under other legislation, federal anti spam legislation, identity theft/ criminal code etc.) that govern the protection of personal information in the private, public and health sectors. Although each statute varies in scope, substantive requirements, and remedies and enforcement provisions, they all set out a comprehensive regime for the collection, use and disclosure of personal information.

The summary below focuses on Canada’s four private sector privacy statutes:

■ Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (“PIPEDA”);

■ Personal Information Protection Act (“PIPA Alberta”);

■ Personal Information Protection Act (“PIPA BC”); and

■ An Act Respecting the Protection of Personal Information in the Private Sector
(“Quebec Privacy Act”), (collectively, “Canadian Privacy Statutes”).
PIPEDA applies (i) to organisations that are deemed to be a “federal work, undertaking or business” (eg banks, telecommunications companies, airlines, railways, and other inter provincial undertakings); (ii) to organisations who collect, use and disclose personal information in the course of a commercial activity which takes place within a province, unless the province has enacted “substantially similar” legislation (PIPA BC, PIPA Alberta and the Quebec Privacy Act have been deemed “substantially similar”); and (iii) to inter provincial and international collection, use and disclosure of personal information.

Definition of PersonaL Data

“Personal information” includes any information about an identifiable individual.

Definition of Sensitive Personal Data

Not specifically defined.

National Data Protection Authority

1. Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (PIPEDA);

2. Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta (PIPA Alberta);

3. Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for British Columbia (PIPA BC); and

4. Commission d’accès à l’information du Québec (Quebec Privacy Act).

Registration

There is no registration requirement under Canadian Privacy Statutes.

Data Protection Officers

PIPEDA, PIPA Alberta and PIPA BC expressly require organisations to appoint an individual responsible for compliance with the obligations under the respective statutes.

Collection and Processing

Canadian Privacy Statutes set out the overriding obligation that organisations only collect, use and disclose personal information for purposes that a reasonable person would consider appropriate in the circumstances.

Subject to certain limited exceptions prescribed in the Acts, consent is required for the collection, use and disclosure of personal information. Depending on the sensitivity of the personal information, consent may be opt in or opt out. Organisations must limit the collection of personal information to that which is necessary to fulfill the identified purposes and only retain such personal information for as long as necessary to fulfill the purposes for which it was collected.

Each of the Canadian Privacy Statutes have both notice and openness/transparency requirements. With respect to notice, organisations are generally required to identify the purposes for which personal information is collected at or before the time the information is collected. With respect to openness/transparency, generally Canadian Privacy Statutes require organisations make information about their personal information practices readily available.

All Canadian Privacy Statutes contain obligations on organisations to ensure personal information in its records is accurate and complete, particularly where the information is used to make a decision about the individual to whom the information relates or if the information is likely to be disclosed to another organisation.

Each of the Canadian Privacy Statutes also provides individuals with (i) a right of access to personal information held by an organisation, subject to limited exceptions, and (ii) a right to correct inaccuracies in/update their personal information records.

Finally, organisations must have policies and practices in place that give effect to the requirements of the legislation and organisations must ensure that their employees are made aware of and trained with respect to such policies.

Transfer

When an organisation transfers personal information to a third party service provider (ie who acts on behalf of the transferring organisation), the transferring organisation remains accountable for the protection of that personal information and ensuring compliance with the applicable legislation. In particular, the transferring organisation is responsible for ensuring that the third party service provider appropriately safeguards the data, and would also be required under the notice and openness/transparency provisions to reference the use of third party
service providers in and outside of Canada, in their privacy policies and procedures.

With respect to the use of foreign service providers, PIPA Alberta specifically requires a transferring organisation to include the following information in its privacy policies and procedures:

■ the countries outside Canada in which the collection, use, disclosure or storage is occurring
or may occur; and

■ the purposes for which the third party service provider outside Canada has been authorized to collect, use or disclose personal information for or on behalf of the organisation.

Under PIPA Alberta, specific notice must also be provided at the time of collection or transfer of the personal information and must specify:

■ the way in which the individual may obtain access to written information about the organisation’s policies and practices with respect to service providers outside Canada; and

■ the name or position name or title of a person who is able to answer on behalf of the organisation the individual’s questions about the collection, use, disclosure or storage of personal information by service providers outside Canada for or on behalf of the organisation.

Security

Each of the Canadian Privacy Statutes contains safeguarding provisions designed to protect personal information. In essence, these provisions require organisations to take reasonable technical, physical and administrative measures to protect personal information against loss or theft, unauthorized access, disclosure, copying, use, modification or destruction. These laws
do not generally mandate specific technical requirements for the safeguarding of personal information.

Breach Notification

Currently, PIPA Alberta is the only Canadian Privacy Statute with breach notification requirements. However, proposed amendments to PIPEDA would require notice of material breaches be made to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada (“OPC”) and, in certain circumstances, to the individuals affected.

In Alberta, an organisation having personal information under its control must, without unreasonable delay, provide notice to the Commissioner of any incident involving the loss of or unauthorised access to or disclosure of the personal information where a reasonable person would consider that there exists a real risk of significant harm to an individual as a result. Notification to the Commissioner must be in writing and include:

■ a description of the circumstances of the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure;

■ the date or time period during which the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure occurred;

■ a description of the personal information involved in the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure;

■ an assessment of the risk of harm to individuals as a result of the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure;

■ an estimate of the number of individuals to whom there is a real risk of significant harm as a
result of the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure;

■ a description of any steps the organisation has taken to reduce the risk of harm to individuals;

■ a description of any steps the organisation has taken to notify individuals of the loss or
unauthorized access or disclosure; and

■ the name and contact information for a person who can answer, on behalf of the organisation,
the Commissioner’s questions about the loss of unauthorized access or disclosure.

Where an organisation suffers a loss of or unauthorized access to or disclosure of personal information as to which the organisation is required to provide notice to the Commissioner, the Commissioner may require the organisation to notify the individuals to whom there is a real risk of significant harm. This notification must be given directly to the individual (unless specified otherwise by the Commissioner) and include:

■ a description of the circumstances of the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure;

■ the date on which or time period during which the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure occurred;

■ a description of the personal information involved in the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure;

■ a description of any steps the organisation has taken to reduce the risk of harm; and

■ contact information for a person who can answer, on behalf of the organisation, questions
about the loss or unauthorized access or disclosure.
On 29 September 2011, proposed amendments to PIPEDA were introduced that, if passed, would require that organisations report to the OPC “any material breach of security safeguards involving personal information under its control”. The proposed amendments also require organisations to notify an affected individual “if it is reasonable in the circumstances to
believe that the breach creates a real risk of significant harm to the individual”. The proposed amendments are not yet in force.

Enforcement

Privacy regulatory authorities have an obligation to investigate complaints, as well as the authority to initiate complaints.

Under PIPEDA, a complaint must be investigated by the Commissioner and a report will be prepared that includes the Commissioner’s findings and recommendations. A complainant
(but not the organisation subject to the complaint) may apply to the Federal Court for a review of the findings and the court has authority to, among other things, order an organisation
to correct its practices and award damages to the complainant, including damages for any humiliation that the complainant has suffered.

Under PIPA Alberta and PIPA BC, an investigation may be elevated to a formal inquiry by the Commissioner resulting in an order. Organisations are required to comply with the order within a prescribed time period, or apply for judicial review. Similarly, under the Quebec Privacy Act, an order must be complied with within a prescribed time period.

PIPA Alberta and PIPA BC also lay out a number of offences, including, but not limited to, obstructing the Commissioner, knowingly making a false statement to the Commissioner, punishing whistle blowers, disposing of information to evade an access request, and failing to comply with an order. In BC, these offences also include the use of deception or coercion
to collect personal information. In Alberta, these offences also include the collection, use, or disclosure of personal information contrary to the Act and failure to provide notice of a breach. Offences are punishable by a fine of not more than $10,000 for individuals and $100,000 otherwise.

Under PIPA Alberta and PIPA BC, where an order has been issued against an organisation or an organisation has been convicted of an offence under the legislation, individuals have a cause of action against the organisation for damages for loss or injury suffered as a result of the organisation’s breach of its obligations under the legislation.

Electronic Marketing

Electronic marketing is governed by both Canadian Privacy Statutes (as discussed above), as well as Canada’s Anti-Spam Legislation (“CASL”). CASL received Royal Assent on December 15, 2010 and is expected to be in force by early 2014.
Under CASL it is prohibited to send, or cause or permit to be sent, a commercial electronic message (defined broadly to include text, sound, voice, or image messages aimed at encouraging participation in a commercial activity) unless the recipient has provided express or implied consent and the message complies with the prescribed content and unsubscribe requirements (subject to limited exceptions).

What constitutes both permissible express and implied consent is defined in the Act and regulations. For example, an organization may be able to rely on implied consent when there is an existing business relationship with the recipient of the message, based on (i) a purchase by the recipient within the past two years; or (ii) a contract between the organization and the recipient currently in existence or which expired within the past two years.

CASL also prohibits the installation of a computer program on any other person’s computer system, or causing electronic messages to be sent from another’s computer system, without express consent, if the relevant system or sender is located in Canada. In addition, the Act contains anti-phishing provisions that prohibit (without express consent) the alteration of transmission data in an electronic message such that the message is delivered to a destination other than (or in addition to) that specified by the sender.

CASL contains potentially stiff penalties, including administrative penalties of up to $1 million per violation for individuals and $10 million for corporations (subject to a due diligence defence). CASL also sets forth a private right of action permitting individuals to bring a
civil action for alleged violations of CASL ($200 for each contravention up to a maximum of
$1 million each day for a violation of the provisions addressing unsolicited electronic messages).

Online Privacy (Including Cookies and Location Data)

Online privacy is governed by Canadian Privacy Statutes (discussed above). In general, Canadian privacy regulatory authorities have been active in addressing online privacy concerns.

For example, in the context of social media, the OPC has released numerous Reports of Findings addressing issues including: default privacy settings; social plug-ins; identity authentication practices; and the collection, use and disclosure of personal information on social networking sites. The OPC has also released decisions and guidance on privacy in the context of Mobile Apps.

In addition, the OPC has released findings and guidelines related to the use of cookies and online behavioral advertising, including findings indicating that information stored by temporary and persistent cookies is considered to be personal information and therefore subject to PIPEDA. The OPC has adopted the same position with respect to information collected in connection with online behavioral advertising.

In Privacy and Online Behavioral Advertising (the “OBA Guidelines”), the OPC stated that it may be permissible to utilize opt-out consent in the context of online behavioral advertising if the following conditions are met:

■ Individuals are made aware of the purposes for the online behavioral advertising, at or before the time of collection, in a manner that is clear and understandable;
■ Individuals are informed of the various parties involved in the online behavioral advertising at or before the time of collection;

■ Individuals are able to opt-out of the practice and the opt-out takes effect immediately and is
persistent;

■ The information collected is non-sensitive in nature (i.e. not health or financial information);
and

■ The information is destroyed or made de-identifiable as soon as possible.

The OPC has indicated that online behavioral advertising must not be a condition of service
and, as a best practice, should not be used on websites directed at children.

With respect to location data, such information, whether tied to a static location or a mobile device, is considered to be personal information by Canadian privacy regulatory authorities. As such, any collection, use or disclosure of location data requires, among other things, appropriate notice and consent. Most of the privacy regulatory authority decisions related
to location data have arisen with respect to the use of GPS in the employment context.
The Canadian privacy regulatory authorities provide the following test that must be met for the
collection of GPS data:

■ Is the data demonstrably necessary to meet a specific need?

■ Will the data likely be effective in meeting that need?

■ Is the loss of privacy proportional to the benefit gained? and

■ Are there less privacy-intrusive alternatives to achieve the same objective?

Corrupt Practices Inquiries Act

(R.S.N.B. 1973, c. C-27)

Interpretation

1 In this Act

“Chief Justice” means the Chief Justice of New Brunswick, and in the case of his absence or inability to act, or of a vacancy in the office, means the Chief Justice of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick and in case of his absence or inability to act, or of a vacancy in the office, the senior puisne judge of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick as specified pursuant to the Judicature Act;

“corrupt practices” means bribery or treating as defined by the Controverted Elections Act;

“election” means an election of a member or members of the Legislative Assembly;

“elector” means a person entitled to vote at such election;

“judge” or “judges” means a judge or judges of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick, appointed as herein provided to conduct an inquiry under this Act;

“Registrar” means the Registrar of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick.

Petition

2 When, within sixty days after the return has been made to the Chief Electoral Officer as required by section 96 of the Elections Act, a petition in the form prescribed by regulation has been presented to the Chief Justice, signed by twenty-five or more electors, stating that corrupt practices have, or that there is reason to believe that corrupt practices have, extensively prevailed in the election, and praying the Chief Justice to cause an inquiry to be made under this Act, he may appoint two judges for the purpose of making an inquiry into the existence of such corrupt practices.

3 The petitioners shall declare to the best of their knowledge and belief, in the form prescribed by regulation, the truth of the allegations contained in the petition; and for the purposes of verifying the petition, the same declaration may be subscribed and declared to by all the petitioners, or different declarations may be subscribed and declared to by the petitioners.

4 In the case of the death of a judge, or of his absence, or his inability for any reason to act, the Chief Justice may appoint another judge to act in his place, and the inquiry shall continue as if the judge so substituted had been appointed in the first instance.

5 Repealed: 1983, c.4, s.3.

6 The judges shall inquire into the manner in which the election was conducted, and whether any corrupt practices were committed at the election, and if so, the nature and particulars of the same, and the persons who directly or indirectly were guilty thereof, and the persons who, before, during, or after the same, were accessories thereto.

7 The judges shall, within a reasonable time after their appointment, hold the inquiry at some convenient place within the electoral district for which the election was held.

8(1) The judges shall give notice, in the form prescribed by regulation, of their appointment and of the time and place of holding the inquiry by publishing the same in one or more newspapers published in such electoral district, and in The Royal Gazette.

8(2) Where no newspaper is so published, the publication in The Royal Gazette shall suffice.

9 On the inquiry the judges shall, subject to the provisions of this Act, have the same powers, jurisdiction and authority as a judge of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick on the trial of a civil cause, and in addition thereto shall have the same powers with respect to witnesses as are conferred upon commissioners by the Inquiries Act.

Witnesses

10 No witness shall be excused from answering any question put to him on such investigation or inquiry, on the ground that the answer to such question shall or may tend to incriminate him.

11 Any person examined as a witness who, in the opinion of the judges, makes a full and true disclosure touching all matters in respect of which he is examined, shall receive a certificate under their hands, stating that the witness has made a full and true disclosure and no evidence given or taken under this Act shall, if such certificate is produced to the Court in which such proceeding is pending, be admissible against such person in any civil proceeding or in any proceedings in respect to any matter within the powers of the Legislature of this Province.

12(1) If any person whom the petitioners may desire to call as a witness touching the matter of the inquiry is without the Province, any judge of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick may, on the application of the petitioners, order a commission to issue for the examination of such person at any place or places out of the Province, on interrogatories or otherwise; and the practice as to obtaining such commission, the proceedings therein, and the attendance and examination of witnesses thereunder shall be the same, as consistently may be, as upon a commission

issued out of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick.

12(2) The depositions, certified by the person taking the same, may, without proof of the signature to such certificate, be received in evidence before the judges.

12(3) The issuing of the commission and its execution may be ex parte, and the depositions shall be closed up under the seal of the person taking the same, and sent by registered mail, postage prepaid, addressed to “The Registrar of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick, Fredericton, N.B., Canada,” and endorsed as follows: “In re the inquiry into corrupt practices at an election for the Electoral District of . . . in the Province of New Brunswick.”

12(4) The Registrar shall, immediately on receipt of the depositions, forward the same to the judge.

13 A witness may have counsel attend during his examination at the inquiry.

14 Any person who neglects or refuses to appear before the judges in obedience to a summons duly served upon the person and offers no reasonable excuse for the neglect

or refusal commits an offence punishable under Part II of the Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a category F offence.

15 The inquiry shall be conducted in public, and the court held hereunder shall be a court of record.

16 The judges may appoint a stenographer to take the evidence, which stenographer shall receive like fees as he would for similar services in The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick.

17(1) Sheriffs and police officers shall, when requested by the judges, give their assistance in connection with the inquiry and shall be entitled to the same fees as are prescribed for similar services.

17(2) Witnesses shall be paid the fees prescribed by regulation.

18 No action shall be maintained against the judges or either of them, by reason of any act done or purporting to be done under the authority of this Act.

19 No person shall be liable to any suit, action or proceeding by reason of his publishing a true account of any report of the judges or of any evidence taken by them, or either of them.

20 The petitioners may appear by counsel, and may have witnesses summoned and may examine any witness giving evidence upon any matter relevant to the inquiry.

21 The judges shall, from time to time, report to the Registrar the evidence taken and the names of all persons whom they find guilty of corrupt practices at the election, with the particulars thereof, and the Registrar shall send the report to the clerk of The Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick for the judicial district in which the inquiry is held.

22 Repealed: 1987, c.4, s.3.

Penalties

23 Any person who writes, sends or communicates to any newspaper published in the Province, or being the editor or person having charge or direction of any newspaper so published, publishes or allows to be published in such newspaper, a report false, in whole or in part, of any evidence taken at an inquiry, commits an offence punishable under Part II of the Provincial Offences Procedure Act as a category F offence.

24 One judge may administer all necessary oaths, issue warrants or summonses for witnesses, adjourn the inquiry from time to time, and to such time and place as he may see fit, and may, with the consent of the other judge, hold inquiries and exercise all the powers that may be exercised by the two of them.

25 Repealed: 1990, c.22, s.9.

26 Repealed: 1990, c.22, s.9.

27 Repealed: 1983, c.4, s.3.

28 The Lieutenant-Governor in Council may make regulations

(a) prescribing forms required under this Act; and

(b) prescribing fees to be paid to witnesses.

（Assented to 10th December, 1998）

An Act respecting the corruption of foreign public officials and the implementation of the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, and to make related amendments to other Acts [Assented to 10th December, 1998]

Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:

1. Short title

This Act may be cited as the Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act.

2. Definitions

The definitions in this section apply in this Act.

“business” means any business, profession, trade, calling, manufacture or undertaking of any kind carried on in Canada or elsewhere for profit.

“foreign public official” means

(a) a person who holds a legislative, administrative or judicial position of a foreign state;

(b) a person who performs public duties or functions for a foreign state, including a person employed by a board, commission, corporation or other body or authority that is established to perform a duty or function on behalf of the foreign state, or is performing such a duty or function; and

(c) an official or agent of a public international organization that is formed by two or more states or governments, or by two or more such public international organizations.

“foreign state” means a country other than Canada, and includes

(a) any political subdivision of that country;

(b) the government, and any department or branch, of that country or of a political subdivision of that country; and

(c) any agency of that country or of a political subdivision of that country.

“peace officer” means a peace officer as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code.

“person” means a person as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code.

3．General

(1) Bribing a foreign public official

Every person commits an offence who, in order to obtain or retain an advantage in the course of business, directly or indirectly gives, offers or agrees to give or offer a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind to a foreign public official or to any person for the benefit of a foreign public official

(a) as consideration for an act or omission by the official in connection with the performance of the official’s duties or functions; or

(b) to induce the official to use his or her position to influence any acts or decisions of the foreign state or public international organization for which the official performs duties or functions.

(2) Punishment

Every person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

(3) Saving provision

No person is guilty of an offence under subsection (1) if the loan, reward, advantage or benefit

(a) is permitted or required under the laws of the foreign state or public international organization for which the foreign public official performs duties or functions; or

(b) was made to pay the reasonable expenses incurred in good faith by or on behalf of the foreign public official that are directly related to

(i) the promotion, demonstration or explanation of the person’s products and services, or

(ii) the execution or performance of a contract between the person and the foreign state for which the official performs duties or functions.

(4) Facilitation payments

For the purpose of subsection (1), a payment is not a loan, reward, advantage or benefit to obtain or retain an advantage in the course of business, if it is made to expedite or secure the performance by a foreign public official of any act of a routine nature that is part of the foreign public official’s duties or functions, including

(a) the issuance of a permit, licence or other document to qualify a person to do business;

(b) the processing of official documents, such as visas and work permits;

(c) the provision of services normally offered to the public, such as mail pick-up and delivery, telecommunication services and power and water supply; and

(d) the provision of services normally provided as required, such as police protection, loading and unloading of cargo, the protection of perishable products or commodities from deterioration or the scheduling of inspections related to contract performance or transit of goods.

(5) Greater certainty

For greater certainty, an “act of a routine nature” does not include a decision to award new business or to continue business with a particular party, including a decision on the terms of that business, or encouraging another person to make any such decision.

4. to 7. Related Amendments

8. to 10. Conditional Amendment

11. [Amendment]

12. Annual report

Within four months of the end of each fiscal year, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister for International Trade and the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada shall jointly prepare a report on the implementation of the Convention on Combating Bribery of Foreign Public Officials in International Business Transactions, and on the enforcement of this Act, and the Minister of Foreign Affairs shall cause a copy of the report to be laid before each House of Parliament on any of the first fifteen days on which that House is sitting after the report is completed.

13. Coming into force

This Act or any of its provisions comes into force on a day or days to be fixed by order of the Governor in Council.

Part IV: Offences against the administration of law and justice

Bribery of judicial officers, etc

Article 119

(1) Every one who

(a) being the holder of a judicial office, or being a member of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, corruptly

(i) accepts or obtains,

(ii) agrees to accept, or

(iii) attempts to obtain,

any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment for himself or another person in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by him in his official capacity, or

(b) gives or offers, corruptly, to a person mentioned in paragraph (a) any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by him in his official capacity for himself or another person, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

2) No proceedings against a person who holds a judicial office shall be instituted under this section without the consent in writing of the Attorney General of Canada.

Article 120.

Every one who

(a) being a justice, police commissioner, peace officer, public officer or officer of a juvenile court, or being employed in the administration of criminal law, corruptly

(i) accepts or obtains,

(ii) agrees to accept, or

(iii) attempts to obtain, for himself or any other person any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment with intent

(iv) to interfere with the administration of justice,

(v) to procure or facilitate the commission of an offence, or

(vi) to protect from detection or punishment a person who has committed or who intends to commit an offence, or

(b) gives or offers, corruptly, to a person mentioned in paragraph (a) any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment with intent that the person should do anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iv), (v) or (vi), is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

Frauds on the government

Article 121.

(1) Every one commits an offence who

(a) directly or indirectly

(i) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to an official or to any member of his family, or to any one for the benefit of an official, or

(ii) being an official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person for himself or another person, a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with

(iii) the transaction of business with or any matter of business relating to the government, or

(iv) a claim against Her Majesty or any benefit that Her Majesty is authorized or is entitled to bestow,whether or not, in fact, the official is able to cooperate, render assistance, exercise influence or do or omit to do what is proposed, as the case may be;

(b) having dealings of any kind with the government, pays a commission or reward to or confers an advantage or benefit of any kind on an employee or official of the government with which he deals, or to any member of his family, or to any one for the benefit of the employee or official, with respect to those dealings, unless he has the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government with which he deals, the proof of which lies on him;

(c) being an official or employee of the government, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind directly or indirectly, by himself or through a member of his family or through any one for his benefit, unless he has the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government that employs him or of which he is an official, the proof of which lies on him;

(d) having or pretending to have influence with the government or with a minister of the government or an official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept for himself or another person a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with

(i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or

(ii) the appointment of any person, including himself, to an office;

(e) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to a minister of the government or an official a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with

(i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or

(ii) the appointment of any person, including himself, to an office; or

(f) having made a tender to obtain a contract with the government

(i) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to another person who has made a tender or to a member of his family, or to another person for the benefit of that person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the withdrawal of the tender of that person, or

(ii) demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from another person who has made a tender a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the withdrawal of his tender.

(2) Every one commits an offence who, in order to obtain or retain a contract with the government, or as a term of any such contract, whether express or implied, directly or indirectly subscribes or gives, or agrees to subscribe or give, to any person any valuable consideration

(a)for the purpose of promoting the election of a candidate or a class or party of candidates to Parliament or the legislature of a province; or

(b) with intent to influence or affect in any way the result of an election conducted for the purpose of electing persons to serve in Parliament or the legislature of a province.

Municipal corruption

Article 123.

(1) Every one who

(a) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to a municipal official, or

(b) being a municipal official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person, a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the official

(c) to abstain from voting at a meeting of the municipal council or a committee thereof,

(d) to vote in favour of or against a measure, motion or resolution,

(e) to aid in procuring or preventing the adoption of a measure, motion or resolution, or

(f) to perform or fail to perform an official act,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

(2) Every one who

(a) by suppression of the truth, in the case of a person who is under a duty to disclose the truth,

(b) by threats or deceit, or

(c) by any unlawful means, influences or attempts to influence a municipal official to do anything mentioned in paragraphs (1)(c) to (f) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

(3) In this section, “municipal official” means a member of a municipal council or a person who holds an office under a municipal government.

Obstructing justice

Bribery of officers

Aticle 139:

(1) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding,

(a) by indemnifying or agreeing to indemnify a surety, in any way and either in whole or in part, or

(b) where he is a surety, by accepting or agreeing to accept a fee or any form of indemnity whether in whole or in part from or in respect of a person who is released or is to be released from custody, is guilty of

(c) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or

(d) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

(2) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner other than a manner described in subsection (1) to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.

(3) Without restricting the generality of subsection (2), every one shall be deemed wilfully to attempt to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice who in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed,

(a) dissuades or attempts to dissuade a person by threats, bribes or other corrupt means from giving evidence;

(b) influences or attempts to influence by threats, bribes or other corrupt means a person in his conduct as a juror; or

(c) accepts or obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain a bribe or other corrupt consideration to abstain from giving evidence, or to do or to refrain from doing anything as a juror.

Aticle 142

Everyone who corruptly accepts any valuable consideration, directly or indirectly, under pretence or on account of helping any person to recover anything obtained by the commission of an indictable offence is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

Police Background Check Procedures

Who can apply?

Individuals in and outside Canada.
Individuals may authorise the results of criminal record verification to be forwarded to a third party upon receipt of written consent*.
*The consent must contain a statement that the subject is aware that refusal to give consent to release information to a third party will not affect their request. The consent must be an original document–faxed or photocopied documents will not be accepted.

Where?

Criminal Real Time Identification Services (RMCP), Canadian Government Police Authority (see below).
Third Party agencies (e.g. truecheck.ca or mybackcheck.com) will not be accepted.
What must the applicant supply?
• Full Name
• Date of birth
• Gender
• Postal address
• Phone number, fax number or email address
• Reason(s) for application: (Applicants for Employment or Volunteer work must also specify the
job title or position sought in the “reason for application” portion of the fingerprint form).
• Processing fee (if applicable)
• Third party consent letter (if applicable)
• Original fingerprint form in the format for external applicants:
• Rolled and flat impressions of all ten fingers taken with black ink
• Full name, date of birth and sex of the applicant
• The name and address of the police agency that took the prints
• The signature of the official taking the fingerprints
• Specify prospective job title in “reason for application” section (see above).
Original fingerprint form in the format for internal applicants:
• Fingerprints taken on form C-216C at local police station or private accredited fingerprinting
agency.
• Fee may apply depending on police jurisdiction.
Hand-delivered fingerprint submissions will not be accepted by local RMCP offices

What are the costs/turnaround?

• Processing fee is $25 CAN or the US equivalent per request.
• Payable to the “Receiver General for Canada” by certified cheque or money order.
• Payments by credit card are not accepted.
• Turnaround can be excess of 120 days due to volume of requests
• For applications within Canada, electronic submissions for people with no criminal records are
processed within a week.

Contact Details

Mail applications:
The Director
Canadian Criminal Real Time Identification Services RCMP, NPS Bldg.
1200 Vanier Parkway Ottawa ON K1A 0R2
Courier applications:
The Director
Canadian Criminal Real Time Identification Services
RCMP, NPS Bldg., Loading Dock #1
1200 Vanier Parkway
Ottawa ON K1A 0R2
Although fingerprint submissions are accepted by courier, civil product results will not be returned bycourier. The results are always returned by regular mail.
Website for details and guidance: http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cr-cj/fing-empr2-eng.htm

Guidelines for Social Media Background Checks

Social media is a relatively new communication medium that continues to transform how we live our lives. However, social media is in its infancy in legal and policy implications. Like a credit or criminal background check, many employers, volunteer agencies, and other organizations are now conducting social media background checks on future and prospective employees and volunteers. They conduct these checks with and without the knowledge of the individuals they are checking. Currently, there is little guidance from administrative tribunals or from courts about this issue. The Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta (“OIPC”) has developed these guidelines to help organizations navigate social media background checks and privacy laws. The OIPC is concerned that organizations may be implementing social media background checks without fully understanding the legal implications of doing so. A “social media background check” can mean many things. It can be as simple as checking a Facebook profile or as complicated as hiring someone to search for every bit of social media about an individual. The term “social media” in these guidelines captures a broad range of information such as social networking sites blogs, micro-blogging, and file sharing sites(including photographs and video).

For many, the concepts of “privacy” and “social media” are inherently at odds, since individuals often post information online about themselves because they want people to see it. When organizations search for information about an individual, the collection, use, and disclosure of that personal information is subject to the privacy provisions of the Personal Information

1 There are many ways that employers can search for social media content about an individual. Microblogging sites like Twitter have real-time search engines (twitter.com/#!/search-home) and sites such as Google Advanced Search (google.ca/advanced_search) filter results by criteria such as domain name and file type.
2 There are now almost 200 major social networking sites. Several boast tens of millions of members. Some networks like www.facebook.com are intended for general social networking purposes. Other niche sites target certain regions (http://mixi.jp ), activities (www.couchsurfing.com/), ethnic groups (www.blackplanet.com/) or faiths (http://muxlim.com/).
3 Employers can search for information from blogs using customized search engines like Google blogs search (www.google.com/blogsearch).
4 One of the best-known micro-blogging sites is twitter.com with over 200 million users.
5 Examples of popular file-sharing sites include www.flickr.com and www.dropbox.com. Guidelines for Social Media Background Checks December 2011 Protection Act (PIPA) here in Alberta. PIPA applies to Alberta organizations and fully to some non-profit organizations and on a limited basis to certain non-profit organizations
6 Putting social media background checks in context While social media background checks may appear enticing, the reality is that many risks associated with conducting social media background checks exist. As a result, organizations need to clearly understand the legal implications associated with conducting a background check using social media in order to properly assess the risks of using social media for background checking.

While social media background checks may appear enticing, the reality is that many risks associated with conducting social media background checks exist. As a result, organizations need to clearly understand the legal implications associated with conducting a background check using social media in order to properly assess the risks of using social media for background checking.
In particular, organizations need to ensure that they comply with the requirements in PIPA with respect to the collection, use and disclosure of personal information and personal employee information, as well as ensure the collection, use and disclosure is reasonable. Organizations also need to recognize that using social media for background checking may result in non-compliance with PIPA because there is no ability to control the amount of information collected, which may result in the collection of irrelevant or too much information about an individual, and collection of third party information. In addition, issues associated with consent and accuracy need to be considered.
Personal information and personal employee information are defined separately in PIPA, and the provisions regarding consent to collect personal information and notice to collect personal employee information should be reviewed carefully by organizations.

Is a social media background check reasonable?

Prior to using social media background checks to collect personal information, an organization must understand its business purpose for doing so, and consider the reasonableness of doing such a check. Under PIPA, an organization must be able to establish that use of social media to collect personal information or personal employee information is reasonable for the purposes of collection. Organizations need to consider what a social media background check will provide that cannot be garnered from traditional means such as reference checks and interviews.

There are other legislative requirements that Organizations should be aware of when collecting personal information via a social media background check such as the Alberta Human Rights Section 56 (b) provides that PIPA does not apply to a “non-profit organization”, which is defined in PIPAas ”an organization that is incorporated under the Societies Act or the Agricultural Societies Act or that is registered under Part 9 of the Companies Act, or that meets the criteria established under the regulations”. For these non-profits, PIPA applies only to personal information collected, used or disclosed in connection with a commercial activity. Any non-profit organization not meeting the definition of “non-profit organization” in PIPA is required to comply fully with the requirements in the Act for all personal information collected, used or disclosed. See sections 1(1)(k) and 1(1)(j) for definitions of personal information and personal employee in formation, respectively. Sections 15, 18, and 21 establish the conditions under which an employer may collect, use or disclose personal employee information without the consent of the employee. Certain provisions must be met.There are legal implications that organizations must consider prior toper forming social media background checks.Page 3 of 7Act. It would not be reasonable to collect personal information under PIPA that violates the Alberta Human Rights Act

Address Format

RECIPIENT

[UNIT_NUMBER]-CIVIC_NUMBER [STREET_NUMBER] [STREET_TYPE] STREET_NAME [STREET_DIRECTION]
LOCALITY PROVINCE_ABBREVIATION POSTAL_CODE
CANADA

Sample

JOHN DOE
811 PORTAGE AVE
WINNIPEG MB R3G 0N3
CANADA

Summary

Calendar GMT Reference Actual Previous Consensus Forecast
2013-03-01 01:30 PM Q4 2012 1.1% 1.5%
TOP
Translate »

Subscribe For Latest Updates

You will receive interesting updates about Background Screening

We will not leak your personal information

Subscribe For Latest Updates

You will receive interesting updates about Background Screening

We will not leak your personal information

Secured By miniOrange