From The Canadian Press via TheStar.com: (Jan. 26)

Bail hearings in cases where there's no threat of tainting a jury pool shouldn't be placed under a publication ban just because the accused asks for one, the Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in a decision released today.

"It's certainly a huge issue in terms of freedom of the press and the public's right to information," Iris Fischer, a media lawyer who worked on the case, said of the ruling.

"Right now, it's very rare that bail hearings can be reported on. Usually the public has no idea – if someone has been granted bail in a high-profile case – why or why not."

A section of the Criminal Code stipulates that if an accused asks for a publication ban on a bail hearing it is automatically granted. The evidence heard at those hearings cannot be reported until a trial is over.

But in a 3-2 decision today, the Appeal Court ruled that should only be the case when there is a chance an ensuing trial might be heard before a jury.

Incidentally, the case stems from the so-called Toronto 18 terror trials. Here's a link to the court's ruling.

There is an Alberta Court of Appeal ruling in the case of wife-murderer Michael White that went the opposite way.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court will likely deal with this issue.