Yes No Share to Facebook
The Charter, Section 13: Self-Crimination
Last Updated: July 05 2026
Question: Can a accused’s right to remain silent and avoid self-incrimination be used to have a criminal charge stayed or evidence excluded from a trial?
Answer: Yes, DefendCharges.Lawyer can help an accused in Ontario argue for a stay of proceedings or seek exclusion of evidence where police or prosecutors violated the right to remain silent and protected against self-incrimination under the Charter. When authorities draw incriminating answers from silence, fail to properly inform rights, or use statements in a way that undermines fairness, a court may exclude that evidence or, in serious cases, stay the charge to protect the integrity of the justice system. Because the outcome depends on what was said, how it was obtained, and timing, DefendCharges.Lawyer can quickly review your situation and explain practical next steps, so you can act early; call (647) 977-5997 for a consultation.
It is possible for a criminal charge to be dropped or evidence to be inadmissible in court if a defendant's right to remain silent is infringed upon?
Yes, it is possible for a criminal charge to be stayed or evidence to be excluded from a trial if a accused's right against self-incrimination is violated.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right of an accused person to remain silent during a criminal trial. This right is commonly known as the right against self-incrimination. It is a fundamental right that is protected by the Charter and is essential for a fair and just trial. The right against self-incrimination is based on the principle that an accused person should not be forced to incriminate themselves. This means that the accused cannot be compelled to answer questions or provide evidence against themselves in a criminal trial. This right is also known as the right to silence. The right against self-incrimination is a fundamental right that is protected by the Charter. This right is often misunderstood by the public, who may think that an accused person is required to answer questions or provide evidence against themselves in a criminal trial. This is not the case. The accused person has the right to remain silent and cannot be compelled to answer questions or provide evidence against themselves. The right against self-incrimination is an important protection for an accused person. It ensures that the accused person is not forced to incriminate themselves and that their rights are respected. This right is essential for a fair and just trial. The right against self-incrimination is not absolute. In certain circumstances, the accused person may be compelled to answer questions or provide evidence against themselves. For example, in a criminal trial, the accused person may be required to testify if they are the only witness to a crime. In these cases, the accused person must be informed of their right to remain silent and the court must consider any potential prejudice to the accused before allowing them to testify.
The Law
The constitutional right, per The Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, Chapter 11, the right not to have any incriminating evidence given as a witness used against a person, with the exception of perjury, is prescribed at section 13, known as the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which states:
Self-crimination
(13) A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence.
