Can somebody explain to me what is considered to be fair notice and whether a law is "vague"? I've read an article under the Principles of Fundamental Justice, and it said:
A law is unconstitutionally vague where it does not give a person fair notice of what to avoid and does not limit the discretion of law enforcement with clear and explicit legislative standards.
Also, in R. v. Levkovic:
In accordance with s. 7 of the Charter , in a criminal context, a statutory provision must afford citizens fair notice of the consequences of their conduct and it must limit the discretion of those charged with its enforcement.
Does this mean that law enforcement has to give us fair notice, or the laws themselves are sufficient? If the laws give fair notice, does that mean citizens must read the laws to get this "fair notice"?
The law of concern is the Security of Information Act, specifically misappropriation of Trade Secrets, where it is a civil offense in Canada. In order for them to prosecute under criminal laws, surely they must provide "fair notice"?