SASKATOON — Closing arguments were finally heard in a human trafficking trial that has spanned almost two years and withstood delays, adjournments, interpreter issues, and scheduling complications.
After hearing submissions by the Crown and defence in Saskatoon Provincial Court on June 3, Judge Miguel F. Martinez reserved his decision until Aug. 7, when an interpreter will be required.
Sohel Haider, 55, and Mohammed Masum, 44, each face charges of human trafficking, with Masum additionally charged with three counts of sexual assault.
Complainant alleges forced labour and surveillance
A publication ban protects the identity of the complainant. The woman, a newcomer to Canada with limited English, was allegedly forced to work 10 to 12 hours a day, seven days a week, at restaurants in Gull Lake, Elrose and Tisdale. Court heard her identification was taken, she was kept under constant surveillance, prevented from seeking help, and threatened with loss of her work permit or police involvement if she didn’t comply.
Haider and Masum were charged in June 2023 by Swift Current RCMP. According to court documents, the alleged offences occurred between Aug. 1, 2022, and March 31, 2023.
Saskatchewan RCMP’s Yorkton STRT, Moose Jaw Crime Reduction Team and Prince Albert General Investigation Section, FINTRAC, the Saskatchewan Ministry of Labour Relations and Workplace Safety, the Saskatchewan Ministry of Immigration and Career Training, the Saskatchewan Ministry of Justice and the Canadian Border Services Agency assisted in the investigation.
Interpreter issues and scheduling limits
Judge Martinez previously described the case as unusually complex, adding that human trafficking prosecutions are rare in Saskatchewan.
“In the Province of Saskatchewan, the offence of human trafficking is novel as this is only the second time a charge under s. 279.01 has been brought to trial here,” he said.
What was originally scheduled to be a five-day trial in Rosetown Circuit Court beginning Sept. 23, 2024, instead stretched into a trial starting and stopping over 21 months.
The trial has been marked by postponements. The co-accused first appeared in court on July 13, 2023. They pleaded not guilty in November 2023 and elected trial in provincial court.
The Crown initially anticipated calling 13 witnesses, but the complainant’s testimony alone consumed the entire week scheduled in September 2024. From there, additional court dates had to be scheduled in Rosetown Circuit Court because it only sits twice a month.
Judge Martinez said interpreter complications added further postponements. Masum’s lawyer first raised the need for a Bengali interpreter in June 2024, prompting adjournments while the court confirmed the correct dialect. Before the trial started, Victim Services told the court that the complainant also required a Bengali interpreter and wanted to testify from behind a screen, shielding her from Haider and Masum, with a support person beside her.
Jordan applications dismissed
Continuances were scheduled across 2025 and 2026 in Rosetown Circuit Court, with more adjournments in May, June, September and November of 2025, as well as January and February 2026.
Both of the accused sought stays of proceedings under the Jordan rule, arguing the delay exceeded the 18-month limit for provincial court matters. Judge Martinez dismissed Masum’s application in May 2025, and denied Haider’s in June 2025, ruling the delays were reasonable and justified given the case’s complexity, the need for continuous translation, and the rarity of human trafficking prosecutions in the province.
Two MLAs intervened over concerns for woman's safety
During the trial, court heard that two Saskatchewan Party MLAs, Hugh Nerlien and Doug Steele, intervened after becoming concerned about the woman’s safety.
“She had been moved a couple of times, so we didn’t know where she was or if she was safe for potentially days,” testified Nerlien.
He said Steele had raised alarms about the woman’s treatment.
“Mr. Steele had expressed to me that he was concerned with how [the victim] was being observed and that ‘something was not quite right’ in the employer-employee relationship,” said Nerlien.
