TOP COURT BALKS AT ON-DEMAND BLOOD SAMPLES

Convicted criminals cannot be ordered to surrender blood and urine
samples on demand when they're out of jail on probation, the Supreme
Court of Canada ruled yesterday.

The decision is a victory for an Abbotsford, B.C., man convicted of
sexual assault, whom a judge ordered to submit fluid samples if
required by police because of his history of substance abuse.

"The seizure of bodily samples is highly intrusive," wrote Justice
Louise Charron in the unanimous ruling. "It is subject to stringent
standards and safeguards to meet constitutional requirements." Judges,
therefore, cannot order that samples be given without a federal law in
place that deals with privacy concerns, the court concluded.

"There is no question that a probationer has a lowered expectation of
privacy," Charron wrote. "However, it is up to Parliament, not the
courts, to balance the probationers' charter rights as against
society's interest." The ruling upholds a B.C. Court of Appeal decision.

Harjit Singh Shoker was sentenced to 20 months in jail and two years'
probation for a 2003 break-and-enter in which he climbed naked into
the bed of an RCMP officer's wife.

The woman called 911, but her husband came home and arrested the
intruder before the local police arrived.

Shoker was convicted of break-and-enter with intent to commit sexual
assault. There was evidence in court that Shoker, then 25, was high on
drugs when he committed his crime.

One of the conditions of his release from jail was that he abstain
from drugs and alcohol and submit to urinalysis, blood tests or a
breathalyzer if requested by police or his probation officer.

The Crown argued in its appeal that the conditions imposed were
"highly desirable for the rehabilitation of the offender and the
protection of the public."