3.2.1 In a criminal proceeding prosecuted by or on behalf of the Director of The Crown and in which [Name] is charged as a person being prosecuted, no statement made by [Name] during one or more basic interviews under the agreement is used as evidence against [name]. , a complex process involving several offices with different mandates. Therefore, at least four levels of consultation may and will often be necessary. The DPP`s power to suspend proceedings does not include the power to terminate prosecutions by provincial law enforcement agencies, unless there are ad hoc or permanent delegated powers for provincial costs (for example. B, an agreement between the enforcement agencies and the major miners). Footnote 4 Therefore, the agreement must be carefully drafted to clarify and clarify the extent of immunity. Counsel for the information provider should be referred to the Attorney General of the province if his client wishes to be immunity from crimes prosecuted by a provincial attorney general. The Crown Attorney may respond to a request for consultation with the provincial representative or, if necessary, consult with the provincial authorities. These immunities may be granted on a case-by-case basis by prosecutors or other authorities, usually in the form of an agreement with witnesses, by law or for witness immunity. Second, in most cases, the immunity process begins with interviews between the information provider and investigators without prior consultation with Crown counsel. After these interviews, the investigators usually turn to the public prosecutor.
Crown counsel relies on the contribution of the investigating authority to balance the relevant criteria of public interest. Crown counsel should ensure that the Agency`s senior auditor overseeing these agreements has reviewed and approved the proposed agreement. The Board of Inquiry makes a recommendation to Crown Counsel. However, the Crown attorney is ultimately responsible for the decision as to who will be prosecuted and who will be called to testify. “disclosure” in paragraph 3 of this agreement, full, complete, open and truthful disclosure of any unprivileged information, evidence or recording related to anti-competitive conduct; When a third party attempts to obtain disclosure of confidential information from a party to this Agreement or from a person covered by this Agreement, that party or individual will immediately notify the parties and take all appropriate steps to resist disclosure, unless the parties to this agreement agree to that disclosure. 4. This grant of immunity does not extend to false or misleading information or statements that Mr. Wilson may knowingly and deliberately pass on to the department after this agreement has been signed. If, in the future, Mr. Wilson knowingly and deliberately provides the department`s agent with false or misleading information or statements, then he may be prosecuted for such conduct under the 18th U.S.
Code 1001 or any other applicable federal criminal law. Subject to the accuracy of the submissions in paragraph 2, the DPP grants current directors [and alumni (if any] ] directors, senior executives and employees [agents, if applicable] [carve-outs of the agreement, for example. B “unlike the individual Y” ] of [X Ltd.] immunity from statutory criminal prosecution with respect to anti-competitive conduct, which depends on the authorization of their knowledge and participation in anti-competitive behaviour, as well as ongoing disclosure and cooperation with DOCUP and the Commissioner.