What happens if evidence is obtained by violating someone's Charter rights?

If evidence is obtained by violating someone's Charter rights, the officer's actions can lead to serious consequences, including the possibility of facing civil or criminal charges. Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 24(2) provides a framework for dealing with evidence obtained through violations of rights. It allows the court to determine whether admitting such evidence would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.

The rationale behind this principle is rooted in maintaining the integrity of the legal system and upholding individuals' rights. Officers who disregard these rights can be held accountable, ensuring that there are mechanisms in place to discourage unlawful practices. The gravity of infringing on Charter rights is taken seriously, and it reflects a commitment to protect citizens from abuses of power by authorities.

In contrast, options that suggest evidence would always be admissible or that there would be no repercussions for the officer overlook the fundamental legal principles focusing on the protection of rights and accountability of law enforcement. The notion that evidence can be used with limitations does not fully encapsulate the legal implications of such violations, which can lead to a significant review process that ultimately prioritizes the rights established under the Charter.