M
Matthew Nathanson
Matthew Nathanson is a Vancouver criminal defence lawyer and founder of MN Law (Matthew Nathanson Law Corporation), with 25+ years of experience arguing cases at all levels of court including the Supreme Court of Canada.
2
APPEARANCES
2
PODCASTS
012
DEC 30
JAN 6
JAN 13
JAN 20
JAN 27
FEB 3
FEB 10
FEB 17
FEB 24
MAR 3
MAR 10
MAR 17
MAR 24
MAR 31
APR 7
APR 14
APR 21
APR 28
MAY 5
MAY 12
MAY 19
MAY 26
JUN 2
JUN 9
JUN 16
JUN 23
JUN 30
JUL 7
JUL 14
JUL 21
JUL 28
AUG 4
AUG 11
AUG 18
AUG 25
SEP 1
SEP 8
SEP 15
SEP 22
SEP 29
OCT 6
OCT 13
OCT 20
OCT 27
NOV 3
NOV 10
NOV 17
NOV 24
DEC 1
DEC 8
DEC 15
DEC 22
DEC 29
JAN 5
JAN 12
JAN 19
JAN 26
FEB 2
FEB 9
FEB 16
FEB 23
MAR 2
MAR 9
MAR 16
MAR 23
MAR 30
APR 6
APR 13
APR 20
APR 27
MAY 4
MAY 11
MAY 18
MAY 25
JUN 1
JUN 8
JUN 15
JUN 22
JUN 29
JUL 6
JUL 13
JUL 20
JUL 27
AUG 3
AUG 10
AUG 17
AUG 24
AUG 31
SEP 7
SEP 14
SEP 21
SEP 28
OCT 5
OCT 12
Oct 9, 2026
His Majesty the King v. Abdel Karim Chemlal (41766)
R
168:14Richard WagnerMODERATOR
[raclement de gorge] Matthew Nathanson.
M
168:21Matthew NathansonGUEST
Chief Justice and Justices, uh, I would like to summarize, if I may, what the court is being asked to do today.
M
168:27Matthew NathansonGUEST
You are being asked to, firstly, either create or affirm a freestanding, uh, power of the police unconnected to any suspicion that an individual is involved in criminality.
M
168:44Matthew NathansonGUEST
You are also being asked to do so on a reduced standard, a suspicion standard below the recognized standard of reasonable belief.
M
168:55Matthew NathansonGUEST
And the third thing you are simultaneously being asked to do is to get away with or remove the imminence requirement.
M
169:04Matthew NathansonGUEST
What is the common thread behind all of those three things? To give the police enormous new powers and to remove the guardrails.
M
169:14Matthew NathansonGUEST
And we have talked extensively about, uh, police safety and public safety here, but the effect of-- the cumulative effect of those three things on individual rights, on charter rights, would be to vastly undermine them.
His Majesty the King v. Abdel Karim Chemlal (41766)
S
168:15speaker_0NARRATOR
Matthew Nathanson.
M
168:20Matthew NathansonGUEST
Uh, Chief Justice and Justices, uh, I would like to summarize, if I may, what the court is being asked to do today.
M
168:27Matthew NathansonGUEST
You are being asked to, firstly, either create or affirm a freestanding, uh, power of the police unconnected to any suspicion that an individual is involved in criminality.
M
168:44Matthew NathansonGUEST
You are also being asked to do so on a reduced standard, a suspicion standard below the recognized standard of reasonable belief.
M
168:55Matthew NathansonGUEST
And the third thing you are simultaneously being asked to do is to get away with or remove the imminence requirement.
M
169:03Matthew NathansonGUEST
What is the common thread behind all of those three things? To give the police enormous new powers and to remove the guardrails.
M
169:14Matthew NathansonGUEST
And we have talked extensively about, uh, police safety and public safety here, but the effect of, the cumulative effect of those three things on individual rights, on charter rights, would be to vastly undermine them.
S
173:30speaker_0NARRATOR
Thank you