For a conviction of obstruction of justice, the Crown must establish several elements.
Firstly, they need to prove that there was an obstruction of a police officer. Additionally,
they must demonstrate that the police officer was acting within the scope of a lawful
purpose. Furthermore, the Crown has to show that the obstruction affected the officer in
the execution of a duty they were actively performing, and lastly, they must prove that the
person obstructing the officer did so intentionally. If someone unintentionally obstructs a
police officer, such as by providing false information accidentally, they would not be
deemed guilty of this offense.
The act of providing a false name or identification to the police may amount to
obstruction, depending on the circumstances of the case. If the police are legitimately
entitled to request a person's name, providing a false answer might be considered
obstruction. However, if the police officer had no right to request identification in certain
situations, it could be argued that they were not "in the lawful execution of their duty," as
required by section 129 of the Criminal Code. The determination of whether the officer
was lawfully executing their duty is a matter for the judge to decide during the accused
person's trial.
Regarding the punishment for obstructing a police officer, it is challenging to predict the
type of penalty a person might receive. Possible outcomes include receiving a criminal
record, being placed on probation, or facing fines. In more serious cases, especially if there
is a related criminal history, the punishment could involve jail time.