the democratic JULY 2004 / VOLUME 38 NUMBER 2

JOURNAL OF THE BRITISH COLUMBIA CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION

The BCCLA acknowledges the generous support of the Law Foundation of BC INSIDE

3 STUDENTS’ RIGHTS Drug Dogs in

Abbortsford Schools SUPREME COURT OF CANADA PHOTO / PHILIPPE LANDREVILLE INC. BCCLA POSITION PAPER 4 CASE UPDATES • Arar Inquiry Judicial Appointments to • Same-Sex Marriage • Strip Searches the Supreme Court of Canada • Panhandling The following is an excerpt from the BCCLA’s new position on Supreme Court of Canada appointments. The complete text can be found at www.bccla.org/positions/dueprocess/04judicial appointments.htm. 6 BCCLA MARIJUANA CONFERENCE Justices Arbour and Iacobucci recently announced that they are retiring from the Supreme Court of Canada, positions that must be filled by summer 2004 for the Court to address its busy fall 13 MUSLIM COMMUNITY schedule. This news, coupled with Prime Minister Martin’s promise to reform the appointment BCCLA Launches process as part of his efforts to address the “democratic deficit,” and Conservative Party leader Outreach Project ’s past criticisms of the Court and court appointments generally, suggests that reform is coming to the appointment process, whether one supports reform or not. 15 TIME FOR LIBERTY This paper suggests that there are sound ant to this constitutional authority, the federal CAMPAIGN and compelling reasons of principle to sup- government has promulgated the Supreme Your Pledges, port reform but that those same principles Court Act. Under section 4(2) of this legisla- Our Thanks also indicate that some types of reforms are tion, judges are appointed by the Governor in acceptable while others are not. Council (i.e. the Cabinet). 16 BOARD AND STAFF There is some confusion about who actu- UPDATES I. The Current Process for Appointments ally appoints judges to the Supreme Court of to the Supreme Court of Canada Canada. While formally, it is the entire Cabi- Formally, the legal source for the existence of net, constitutional scholar Peter Hogg sug- the Supreme Court of Canada resides in the gests that the Prime Minister is responsible for Constitution Act, 1867 (formerly known as the appointing the Chief Justice of the Supreme British North America Act). Under section 101 Court and will be involved in the selection of of this Act, the Parliament of Canada has the “puisne” (i.e. sitting judges) of the Court BC Civil Liberties legal authority to provide “for the Constitu- along with the Minister of Justice. As a matter Association tion, Maintenance, and Organization of a of law, at least three sitting judges must come Protecting the freedoms of General Court of Appeal for Canada.” Pursu- continued on page 8 British Columbians since 1963 THE DEVILISH ADVOCATE / A message from president John Russell

RENOVATING DEMOCRACY

I recently had a direct confrontation with democracy impressed me most was that all affected parties had a that reminded me of its enduring attractions and full opportunity to contribute to the deliberations. No value. one’s time was cut short, and when it came time to I am not referring to the recent federal election, vote, everyone had had their say and it certainly ap- which cynics will regard as a tough case for defending peared that an informed decision was possible. democracy’s virtues. No, I am referring to In our own case, our next door neighbour showed an apparently tougher case — a hearing up unexpectedly with his family in tow to complain before Vancouver City’s Board of Variance that our proposal would increase the shade in his to add about 50 square feet to our home’s back yard and would “wreck” his privacy. We re- upstairs so that a second bathroom could sponded that the addition would be below the crest of be installed at close range from the family the roof and so should have virtually no impact on sleeping quarters. shade. The window on the plan did not directly over- The decision should have been a “no- look their house, and in any event would be opaque brainer,” according to our architect. I was to ensure our own privacy (it is a bathroom after warned, however, to bring a book to the all...). Decision: unanimous in our favour. BCCLA president hearing, since the Board rarely meets its There are two main virtues of democracy evident John Russell timetable. here. The first one is that it is probably the best The wheels of democracy did in fact grind slowly mechanism humans have yet devised for making in- the day of the hearing. However, my book was no formed, morally sound decisions where there are match for the human dramas on display in front of many interests to assess. Make no mistake, these are me, as different appellants made their cases for varying moral judgments. There are important competing building restrictions on their property. One home- interests at stake, and they must be heard properly to owner wished to design a house on a lot with a steep be assessed fairly and impartially. A decision then grade, so that the main living area was in the base- requires the best judgment each voter can make based ment. This would allow his elderly mother to avoid on the available information. climbing stairs and to have easier street access. The The other advantage is that such a process shows design, however, increased the bulk and height of the respect for the parties who are affected by the deci- house in ways that mightily upset his neighbours. sion. Besides the intrinsic merits of that, it contributes Another family simply wanted to move a side door to social stability. My neighbour, as far as I could tell, onto the front of the house so that their kitchen and held no hard feelings. He may even have been per- family room were more functional. We desperately suaded by the arguments. In any event, he knew that needed another bathroom. he had been treated fairly even if he disagreed with Seen up close, it was easy to see that these were not the decision. We are still on speaking terms. small things in people’s lives. What was particularly It is easy to be cynical about the partisan demo- impressive, even heartening, was that the process and cratic bodies that we elect. But we need to be re- the decision-makers themselves clearly demonstrated minded why we have chosen to be governed in this respect for the importance of these matters to all the way and to temper cynicism with commitment to affected individuals. improving our democratic institutions where they The process is exemplary on paper. It requires ap- need improvement. It’s good to be reminded of this as pellants’ submissions in advance, notification of neigh- we confront some of the more frustrating realities of bours, opportunities for written and oral submissions, democracy on its larger stages. input from city planners, questions from Board mem- bers, opportunities for closing remarks, and then a vote by an appointed non-partisan board. Of course, this is merely process, and it could be 2 undermined easily. But that did not happen. What JOHN RUSSELL, PRESIDENT STUDENTS’ RIGHTS Abbotsford School Board

“policing” student drug offences British Columbia Civil Liberties Association Abbotsford School Board is seeking to es- both aspects of this proposal. One issue is 425 – 815 West Hastings Street tablish a new drug policy that would allow the inaccuracy of performance by drug Vancouver, British Columbia searches of lockers by drug detection dogs detection dogs. Research conducted on dog Canada V6C 1B4 and create “Drug Free Zones” within a two- sniff search reliability has determined that Phone: (604) 687-2919 block radius of schools. dog/handler teams with a 98 percent accu- E-mail: [email protected] Although it has yet to be officially ap- racy rate have a correct detection rate of Web: www.bccla.org proved by the School Board, the Abbotsford less than 20 percent – that is, 80 percent of Office hours: 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. trustee who proposed the policy has indi- alerts would be false. This unreasonable Monday to Friday cated that locker searches would be amount of false positives would result in an Board of Directors “suspicionless.” Drug dogs hired from pri- unreasonable number of innocent students John Russell, President vate security firms would be brought in subjected to the indignity of being singled John Dixon, Vice President every three or four weeks to conduct ran- out and searched. Alan Rowan, Treasurer dom “sniffs” of school hallways. Drug-sniffing dogs would also create a Jason Gratl, Secretary The School Board also proposes – incor- “policing” atmosphere in schools, compro- Dale Beyerstein, Sam Black, rectly – that federal Crown Counsel would mising both students’ privacy rights and Warren Bourgeois, Alister Browne, seek double and triple the normal sentences their level of comfort within their school Jamie Cameron, Larry Cohen, for those caught trafficking or in possession environment. The dogs’ presence could be Tim Christie, Ann Curry, Greg Delbigio, Avigail Eisenberg, of narcotics within its “Drug Free Zones.” highly distressing to students and staff trau- Michael Feld, Hamar Foster, There is no authorization in the Criminal matized by past encounters with canines. Tom Gore, Jason Gratl, Code, the Controlled Drug and Substances Act, The wish to impose severe penalties for Conrad Hadland, Laura Huey, or the Youth Criminal Justice Act for double narcotics-related offences exemplifies the Andrew Irvine, Craig Jones, Stephen Katz, John Kibblewhite, and triple penalties for drug offences near failed American “war on drugs” mentality Ross Lambertson, Ed Levy, schools. Indeed, the Youth Criminal Justice rather than a rehabilitative approach to Mary McDonald, John J. McIntyre, Act states that appropriate youth sentencing drug problems among students. Although Shona Moore, Stan Persky, should seek to rehabilitate the youth and the BCCLA recognizes that school adminis- Ann Pollak, Maxine Ruvinsky, Martin Schechter reintegrate him or her into society. The trators must establish internal rules and BCCLA has confirmed with Crown Counsel sanctions governing drug abuse, we believe Staff responsible for past prosecutions that they they should act as educators rather than Murray Mollard, Executive Director would not agree to seek increased sentences. law enforcers. Abbotsford’s proposed drug Micheal Vonn, Policy Director The BCCLA has written to both the policy appears to create an unsuitable mar- Jim Braunagel, Office Manager Abbotsford School Board and to federal riage between schools and the criminal Lil Woywitka, Crown Counsel outlining our concerns with justice system. Membership Secretary Tom Sandborn, BCCLA Opposes Vancouver School Board/VPD Information Sharing Proposal Development Officer The BCCLA issued a strongly worded letter to trustees of the Vancouver School Board The Democratic Commitment is a publication of the British Columbia urging them to deep-six a proposal between the VSB and the Vancouver Police allowing Civil Liberties Association. The the police unfettered access to student records. The draft Memorandum of Understand- Association was established in ing, ostensibly to promote law enforcement by opening up student files to police, had 1962, and is the oldest continu- ously active civil liberties associa- reached the VSB for their approval without prior knowledge of trustees. The BCCLA tion in Canada. Its mandate is to pointed out that the MOU was likely illegal under the provisions of the Freedom of Informa- preserve, defend, maintain, and tion and Protection of Privacy Act. To their credit, VSB trustees killed the project without extend civil liberties and human rights in British Columbia and undertaking a privacy impact assessment required by the Information and Privacy Commis- across Canada. sioner. However, the BCCLA remains concerned about current practices, given the draft Publications mail MOU, and has made an access-to-information request for current policy and practice. agreement 40045354 CASE UPDATES

WAR ON TERRORISM HUMAN RIGHTS Update on the Arar Inquiry BCCLA Intervenes in Same-Sex Marriage Reference Represented by Joe Arvay, Q.C., the Association was recently awarded intervenor status into the Arar In- The BCCLA has been granted intervenor status before quiry. Mr. Arar is the Canadian of Syrian birth who the Supreme Court of Canada in the same-sex mar- was extradited by the United States to Syria, via Jor- riage reference. The BCCLA will argue that the failure dan, where he spent almost a year being subjected to to allow same-sex couples to marry is an infringement torture. The U.S. had extradited him ostensibly on the of the equality provisions of the Charter (section 15). basis of his ties to terrorism. Mr. Arar has continually The BCCLA will also argue that the creation of a ‘civil argued his innocence. The Liberal government subse- union’ alternative to marriage for same-sex couples quently ordered an inquiry under Justice Dennis still perpetuates a distinction between same-sex and O’Connor, the same Commissioner who led the opposite-sex couples which violates the essential dig- Walkerton Inquiry, to probe into the actions of Cana- nity of same-sex couples. dian officials. Just as Catholic priests may Unfortunately, refuse to marry Protestant Commissioner couples, government sanc- O’Connor denied the tioned same-sex marriages BCCLA standing to will not compel religious participate directly in officials to perform marriages the Factual Inquiry of same-sex couples that are through participation contrary to their religious of counsel in the evi- beliefs because church offi- dence. He also denied cials are not required to sol- our requests for ad- emnize marriages which their equate funding to be religion does not condone. able to have counsel In addition to these points, attend the hearings. the BCCLA will introduce a Disappointed but not novel argument about the use deterred, the BCCLA will follow the proceedings of section 1 of the Charter in cases where section 15 is closely via TV and transcripts to prepare a final sub- infringed by a common law rule – as in the case of a mission based on the evidence. In this task, the prohibition on same sex marriages – rather than by BCCLA and Mr. Arvay will be ably assisted by Matt legislation. Under section 1 of the Charter, the gov- Pollard, a former associate of Mr. Arvay’s at the law ernment must show that an infringement is demon- firm of Arvay Finlay who is now studying interna- strably justifiable in a free and democratic society. We tional law in England. Critical to the Inquiry will be argue that: the degree of public access to evidence over which the “Section 15(1) is only engaged when the impact government lays claim of confidentiality due to na- of a distinction deprives members of a disadvantaged tional security. group of the law’s protection or benefit in a way In a post-September 11 world, the BCCLA views which negatively affects their essential human dig- the Arar Inquiry as a critically important development nity and personhood. When this standard is kept in for assessing the actions, policies and laws of the gov- mind, it follows that an unequal application of the ernment and their impact on fundamental freedoms. law, in breach of section 15, could never be demon- Stay tuned. strably justified in a free and democratic society

The hearing is being broadcast live on the CPAC without legislative authorization. If society would i channel. Transcripts of testimony at the hearing can be tolerate such discriminatory law at all, it must be accessed by visiting: http://www.ararcommission.ca/ enacted by an elected legislative body responding to 4 eng/11e.htm. a pressing concern in a balanced, minimally intru- sive way. The legislature would then face both judi- PERSONAL FREEDOMS cial review and public scrutiny of its decision.” BCCLA Opposes “Safe Streets Act” Elliott Meyers, Q.C. and Craig Jones, both of Bull Panhandling Prohibitions Housser Tupper, are ably representing the BCCLA. The hearing is scheduled for fall 2004. The “Safe Streets Act,” a private member’s bill recently introduced in the provincial legislature, would pro- For the full text of our legal argument to the Court, visit i the BCCLA website at: www.bccla.org/legal hibit solicitation of all kinds in certain public places, arguments.html. such as near transit stops and parking lots. Clearly intended to be used against panhandlers and not Brownies selling cookies or war veterans offering PRISONERS’ RIGHTS poppies, the bill is guaranteed to be selectively en- Practice of Unconstitutional Strip forced. The BCCLA opposes the bill on the following Searches at Vancouver Jail Remedied grounds 1. it would prohibit activity (simply asking people In the fall of 2003, the BCCLA initiated a policy com- on the street for money) that should not be plaint to the Vancouver Police Board regarding a man- prohibited in a free and democratic society; datory strip search policy at the Vancouver Jail. The 2. where the bill contains prohibitions that are BCCLA argued that the mandatory strip searching of justifiable, such as the prohibition against solic- all persons in custody at the jail violated section 8 of iting in an “aggressive manner,” there are al- the Charter. In BCCLA’s view, a policy of mandatory ready alternative means to address these prob- strip searches does not conform with the ruling in the lems in other legislation; and Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R. v. Golden, 3. there is every reason to believe that the bill which clearly states that strip searching short-term would be enforced almost exclusively against detainees cannot be “routine policy” and that reason- the poor. able and probable grounds must be established for The BCCLA is concerned that the bill is yet another each individual strip search. proposed law that attempts to remove persons who While the policy complaint was in process, a new are not decorous law regulating procedures at B.C. correctional centres from the view of the was passed. Because of the unique circumstances at general public. the Vancouver jail where the jail staffing has been The legislature contracted to Corrections, this law will also apply to adjourned before the Vancouver jail. BCCLA objected to the implication the bill was passed that the new legislation would remedy unconstitu- into law. The BC- tional strip searches. CLA will monitor The new law, while not requiring mandatory strip the fall session to searches on admission, nevertheless allows for strip see if it is reintro- searches on admission and specifically excludes the duced. requirement for reasonable and probable grounds to search. i To view the The BCCLA has recently received a response to its BCCLA press release objecting to the legislation, visit: initial policy complaint. In the response, the Police www.bccla.org/pressreleases/04safestreets.org Board announced procedural and structural changes designed to bring the strip search policy into compli- ance with the judicial authorities. The Police Board has informed us that case by case assessments are now being made and a training component provided to all patrol members. The BCCLA continues to work with the Police Board to monitor the implementation plan. 5 DRUG LAW REFORM

BCCLA Hosts Marijuana Conference

On May 8, 2004, the BCCLA hosted “Beyond Prohibition: Legal Cannabis in Canada,” a conference devoted to describing what a post-prohibition cannabis environment might look like. By all accounts, the event was an unqualified success. Held at the beautiful Wosk Centre for Dialogue in downtown Vancouver, Beyond Prohibition featured speakers from around the world and encompassed a variety of cannabis-related topics. Moreover, due to the unique structure of the Wosk Centre (a round forum with microphones at each seat), conference attendees were able to dialogue with all participants.

ABOVE: “Beyond Prohibition” conference speakers and attendees. RIGHT: Conference speakers Rielle Capler and Hilary Black of the B.C. Compassion Club Society.

Leading off the conference was Vancouver Mayor decriminalization would be a mistake because it pre- Larry Campbell. Mayor Campbell pulled no punches, serves the worst of all potential systems. Instead, Profes- declaring that cannabis should be legalized and taxed, sor Miron made the case that legalization, with minimal with revenues from the taxation earmarked for use in restrictions, was the only economically plausible option. the health care system. In taking a position explicitly Walter McKay, an ex-member of the Vancouver calling for an end to prohibition, Mayor Campbell Police Department’s drug squad, then made a presen- further cemented his status as the most progressive tation that was the most sobering moment of the day, big-city mayor in Canada and a true champion of civil particularly in his description of the dramatic harms liberties. associated with drug prohibition. Drawing on his per- Next up was Philippe Lucas, founder of the Van- sonal experiences, Mr. McKay made a compelling ar- couver Island Compassion Society. Mr. Lucas demon- gument that prohibition causes far more harm than it strated the problems with Health Canada’s medical prevents. cannabis program and contrasted the low quality After a dialogue session and a short break, the con- samples of the cannabis grown by Prairie Plant Sys- ference resumed with a presentation from Dr. Brian tems, the government’s sole supplier, with that grown Emerson, a consultant with the BC Ministry of Health organically by cultivators for the Compassion Society. Services. Dr. Emerson argued that a criminal law based Jeffrey Miron, professor of economics at Boston approach to drug use was a mistake and proposed that University, then took the podium to discuss the eco- we tackle illegal drug use as a public health issue, simi- nomics of prohibition and the ramifications of legali- lar to the way society views the problematic use of legal 6 zation. According to Professor Miron, substances like tobacco and alcohol. Next up was a pinch-hitter. Unfortunately Steph Stroup, was next. Mr. Stroup described US efforts Sherer, of Americans for Safe Access, was too ill to at cannabis reform and discussed the international attend the conference. Instead, Dr. Tod Mikuriya obligations imposed on countries as a result of graciously agreed to speak to the California medical various UN treaties. He concluded that legaliza- model and his personal experiences as a physician tion was a viable option. Mr. Stroup’s most power- attempting to prescribe cannabis to his critically and ful message, however, was a plea for political in- chronically ill patients. volvement and a request that no one vote for an Concluding the health-based portion of the agenda elected official who considered cannabis users to was the team of Rielle Capler and Hilary Black, both be criminals. of the British Columbia Compassion Club Society. Eugene Oscapella, a founding member of the Ca- Ms. Capler and Ms. Black made a detailed presenta- nadian Foundation for Drug Policy, completed the tion of the BCCCS standards for distribution of medi- panel. Mr. Oscapella made a compelling argument for cal cannabis, and drew a “Roadmap to Compassion” legalization, rejecting other policy alternatives such as that could act as a template for the non-profit, locally- decriminalization or continued use of the criminal based distribution of medical grade cannabis. law. Mr. Oscapella’s discussion succinctly brought

Dr. Brian Emerson LEFT: Keith Stroup, Eugene Oscapella and Senator Pierre Claude Nolin. ABOVE: Marc Emery and Walter McKay.

After lunch, the conference together many of the various themes explored resumed with a presentation by throughout the day. Professor Peter Cohen, of the Finally, Senator Pierre Claude Nolin delivered the Centre for Drug Research in keynote address. Senator Nolin drew on his experi- Amsterdam. Dr. Cohen drew on ence as the Chair of the Special Senate Committee the experience of the Nether- that researched the issue of cannabis policy for eight- lands’ quasi-legal cannabis envi- een months before delivering its report in 2002, and

Former BCCLA Policy ronment, as well as his empirical explained that legalization was the only rational op- Director and conference research comparing usage rates tion for cannabis policy. After the keynote speech, the organizer Kirk Tousaw in San Francisco and Amster- conference attendees were given almost an hour to dam, in order to demonstrate that public policy is question the presenters, discuss the various topics irrelevant to the issue of levels of cannabis use. Prohi- and engage in constructive dialogue about cannabis bition, it seems, fails to deter cannabis use. policy in Canada. Next up was another duo, Wendy Little and Eric The BCCLA would like to thank its generous spon- Nash of Island Harvest Certified Organic Cannabis. sors for making Beyond Prohibition both possible and Island Harvest is the only legal cannabis supplier in a fabulous success. These include the Tides Canada Canada that grows fully-certified organic cannabis. Foundation, Advanced Nutrient Systems and Marc Ms. Little and Mr. Nash clearly illustrated that grow- Emery.

ing cannabis is not intrinsically dangerous. Instead, it The full presentations are available online, in video, at becomes dangerous only as a result of prohibition. i www.pot-tv.net. Transcripts of certain presentations are The founder of the US-based National Organi- available at www.bccla.org/proceedings.htm. zation for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, Keith Photos by Rev. Damuzi 7 BCCLA POSITION PAPER | APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA continued from page 1 from (section 6 of the Supreme Court Act) and • Diversity: “the extent to which the court’s com- as a matter of convention, three judges originate from position adequately reflects the diversity of Ca- , two from Western Canada and one from the nadian society.” four Atlantic provinces. The only explicit qualification The Department of Justice also considers “jurispru- for membership on the Court is that a candidate ei- dential profiles” regarding volume of decisions, areas ther must currently sit as a judge of a superior court of expertise, outcome of appeals, and the degree to of a province or have been a member of a law society which decisions have been followed by lower courts. for at least ten years (section 5). Once this process is complete, the Minister of Jus- As part of its deliberations regarding the appoint- tice recommends a nominee to the Prime Minister ment process in 2004, the House of Commons Stand- who, if he agrees, will confirm the appointment. ing Committee on Justice, Human Rights, Public The strengths of this process are identified prima- Safety and Emergency Preparedness (“Justice Com- rily through the fact that there is considerable consen- mittee”) heard testimony from Irwin Cotler, the Min- sus among experts that appointments to the Court, at ister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, on least over the last thirty years, have been excellent. March 30, 2004, who described the current appoint- Expert witnesses to the Justice Committee that re- ment process. cently examined the process have noted that the Su- Mr. Cotler describes two parts to this process: the preme Court of Canada, as an institution, is highly identification of outstanding candidates and the as- regarded in the juridical world community and its sessment of identified candidates. The Minister of judgments are adopted by other courts around the Justice undertakes both parts of this process by a world, notably by the courts of Israel and South Af- series of consultations involving the following people: rica. • Chief Justice of Canada or other sitting members The obvious weakness of this system may be its (to discuss needs of the Court) lack of transparency and consequently the fact that • Attorney(s) General of province or region the formal procedure is unclear even among members of the legal community. Such uncertainty endangers • Chief Justice(s) of province or region and Chief legitimacy and breeds a lack of confidence in the Justice of trial level superior court process, if not among “experts” then at least in the • President of Canadian Bar Association and local general public, a danger to be avoided if the institu- CBA representatives of province or region tion of the Supreme Court of Canada is to maintain its • President(s) of law society of province or region. high regard in Canada and elsewhere. Critics argue Once potential candidates are identified, they are that Canada is the only western liberal democracy assessed for merit based on specific criteria including: with such a closed and discretionary system for high court appointments. • Professional capacity: superior intellectual ability, In addition, some experts argue that, if not true in analytical and writing skills, proven ability to fact, there is at least the problem of a perception of listen to all sides of an issue and maintain an danger that the Court appointments could be politi- open mind, decisiveness and soundness of judg- cized when the Prime Minister has ultimate authority ment, capacity to manage heavy workload in a to determine appointments with little in the way of collaborative environment, capacity to manage formal constraints upon his choice. While no one has stress and isolation of judicial role, strong coop- criticized past appointments as being purely partisan erative skills, awareness of social context, bilin- or political, at least at the Supreme Court of Canada gual capacity, specific expertise required for the level, with no formal constraints on the process, there Court is a legitimate concern that judicial independence • Personal characteristics: impeccable personal and might be at risk if the Prime Minister appoints only professional ethics, honesty, integrity and forth- those he sees as friendly to his government and its rightness, respect and regard for others, pa- policy. tience, courtesy, tact, humility, impartiality, While no known politician or expert has argued tolerance, responsibility, common sense, punc- that certain appointments to the Supreme Court have 8 tuality and reliability been politically motivated, the same is not true of appointments in lower courts, including Courts of concerns that, however much one might believe that Appeal. As you may recall, in September of 2003, past Court appointments were non-politicized, it dem- Stephen Harper alleged that the Liberal government onstrates that there are important political players who and the courts had conspired via appointments of might be more motivated to take into account purely judges friendly to rendering judgments to laws prohib- political concerns when appointing judges to the iting same-sex marriages as unconstitutional so that the Court. The primary point to underscore here is that, Liberal government could sidestep the political contro- under our current system of appointments, there are versy by permitting courts to decide the question: no formal constraints or procedural safeguards to pre- I think it’s a typical hidden agenda of the Liberal party vent this from happening. The wisdom of relying on ... They had the courts do it for them, they put the judges in they wanted, then they failed to appeal – failed to fight the case in court ... I think the federal gov- ernment deliberately lost this case in court and got the change to the law done through the back door. This allegation was roundly criti- cized in the media for various reasons, including the fact that Roy McMurtry, the Chief Justice of the Ontario Court of Appeal and one of three judges who ruled unanimously in striking down the common law restriction of marriage to heterosexual couples in Halpern v. Canada (Attorney General), was ap- pointed by ’s Progres- There is considerable consensus among experts that appointments to the Court, at least sive Conservative Party of Canada and over the last thirty years, have been excellent. Expert witnesses to the Justice Commit- had previously been an Attorney Gen- tee that recently examined the process have noted that the Supreme Court of Canada, eral of Ontario in Bill Davis’s Conserva- as an institution, is highly regarded in the juridical world community and its judgments tive government. are adopted by other courts around the world. SUPREME COURT OF CANADA PHOTO / PHILIPPE LANDREVILLE INC. Harper continues to make comments the good faith of future Prime Ministers to honour this that could be construed as challenging the notion of approach is questionable if one is concerned about judicial independence, a principle that is discussed ensuring judicial independence. later in this paper. In particular, Mr. Harper has stated In addition, it is important to note that a major im- that he believes that the Supreme Court of Canada petus of the move to reform the Court appointment would refuse to interfere with federal legislation pro- process, that has certainly now found a warm reception hibiting same-sex marriages: in the conservative right and beyond, has emanated I am confident that if the Parliament expresses its from a group of academics and political commentators views clearly on this, which is something that Parlia- who have been very critical of what they call “judicial ment refused to do under the Liberals, then I am quite activism” by the Court. These critics argue that the certain that the Supreme Court will understand that Supreme Court has, without justification or authority, and respect Parliament’s competency to deal with such usurped the supremacy of parliaments (both federal a matter. and provincial) by invalidating legislation mostly Mr. Harper made this statement after being asked through the Court’s interpretation of the Charter of whether he would use the notwithstanding clause to Rights and Freedoms and/or imposed a theory of consti- override a Court decision endorsing same-sex marriages. tutional review that does not give due credence to the While Mr. Harper may just be playing politics, it is original intent of framers of the Charter. As a means of important to note his views on these issues because of redressing this inappropriate judicial activism and 9 BCCLA POSITION PAPER | APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA continued from page 9 ensuring judicial accountability, these critics seek to 1. Appointments must be based on merit. reform the Court’s appointment process to permit a Merit must be the overriding reason for appointing a greater degree of Parliamentary scrutiny over the particular individual to the Supreme Court of Canada. membership of the Court. For reasons articulated in Thus, the appointment process must be one that is greater degree elsewhere, the B.C. Civil Liberties Asso- designed to best assess the merit of potential candi- ciation should oppose their concerns about judicial dates both in terms of who participates in this process activism and should be wary of the motives for and and what considerations are taken into account in the substance of their recommendations for reform. In assessment. Of course there will be a variety of factors brief, their criticisms ought to be rejected as contrary to consider in making appointments based on merit. to the fundamental principles of the rule of law and The factors the Minister of Justice weighs in consider- judicial independence; they simply do not adequately ing the merit of a potential candidate – professional reflect the complexity of the institutions and structure capacity, personal characteristics and diversity – are a of constitutional democracy that now exists in Canada. strong starting point as a check list for a thorough It is fair to suggest that many within the Conserva- assessment. While there must be a degree of flexibility tive Party of Canada, if not Stephen Harper personally, in designing a process, it would be important to en- share these same, invalid concerns with respect to shrine the principle of merit into a legal requirement judicial activism. It is reasonable to be concerned that so that those responsible for choosing or recommend- such ideas may wield considerable influence in ing appropriate candidates for the Court must select if not in 2004, then at some point in the not too dis- and justify their decisions according to merit. tant future. As will be discussed later in this paper, these con- 2. Appointments must be made in such a way as to promote the democratic legitimacy of the Court. cerns regarding politicization are not meant to argue that a Prime Minister should not have significant influ- An appointment process must be perceived to be ence with respect to the choice of appointments. legitimate by all and promote the legiti- Rather, the current system is vulnerable to outright macy of the Court. To achieve democratic legitimacy, politicization with no constraints to guard against such the process must engender public confidence that manipulation. Thus, there are strong reasons to sup- appointments will be made according to merit and port reform to the current process to ensure the integ- not for partisan political purposes. One of the prob- rity of the Court by safeguarding the principles of lems with the current process is that there is the po- judicial independence and impartiality, as further tential, if not real evidence of past practice, for the discussed below. Prime Minister to make appointments for partisan political reasons. II. Principles For the Supreme Court to maintain its legitimacy, there must be general confidence in the appointment Any process for judicial appointments to the Supreme process. While there will naturally be criticism of any Court of Canada must be guided by an overarching set particular Court decision, at time strong criticism, the of principles. Ideally, such principles should be en- source for this criticism should not emanate from an shrined in law in order to properly guide the appoint- unfair, opaque appointment process that is potentially ment process. These principles would provide the subject to partisanship. Thus, this process must hold framework for three key elements of the process: who the general confidence of the following segments of makes appointments, how they are made and on what the population: basis they are made. • The Judiciary: To attract the most qualified ju- The following principles will be essential to the rists, the process must be one that the judiciary appointment process and should act as the founda- in general holds in high esteem. Members of the tions upon which one answers the questions of who, Court must believe that they merit their ap- how and what. pointments and so must their colleagues at other • Merit levels of court whose decisions will be subject to • Democratic Legitimacy review by the Supreme Court and who must 10 • Judicial Independence and Impartiality follow Supreme Court precedents. Those who aspire to membership in the Court must be will- One of the principal mechanisms by which demo- ing to be subject to the review process for candi- cratic legitimacy can be achieved is by ensuring that dates, thus attracting top candidates. The process the process by which members of the Court are cho- must be transparent and fair. sen is itself legitimate. With increased focus on the This point is important in Canada where the current process, the relatively secretive process is an candidate pool for the Court, especially from less easy target for criticism of political manipulation. By populated regions like Atlantic Canada, is going to making the process clear to all Canadians, these sus- be relatively small. We want to be careful not to picions, whether valid or unfounded, cannot be sub- discourage the best candidates by subjecting them stantiated. to an appointment process that may be overly Furthermore, by making the process more inclu- politicized or potentially risky to their current sive, various interests will be able to influence the careers. It is important to remember that the best outcome, adding further legitimacy to the process. candidates will have other career options some- With respect to the issue of transparency, a couple times more attractive than working in Ottawa. of comments are in order. First, greater transparency • Legal Community: As fellow guardians of the rule will have the additional value of providing a valuable of law and as advocates before the Court, lawyers means to educate the general public about the Court, and legal and other academics must also believe its mandate, its operations and about the people on that appointments are of the highest quality. the Court. Whatever reforms are made to the appoint- ment process, it would be an important advance to • Parliamentarians: The Supreme Court is the ulti- codify the process in legislation such as the Supreme mate arbiter of legislation passed by elected repre- Court Act. sentatives. Thus, Parliamentarians (both federal Second, a note of caution is important. The nature and provincial) must also firmly believe that those of democratic legitimacy is by necessity going to be who will judge their laws merit membership in different with respect to the appointment of judges to the Court because of outstanding juristic qualities the Supreme Court of Canada than it would be for the rather than partisan affiliations or political view- election of elected representatives. They are funda- points. Provincial input is critical given that the mentally different positions with different mandates Court rules on federalism disputes between the and responsibilities and so the standards and process federal government and provinces. for attaining office and accountability for elected rep- • General Public: The general public must also be- resentatives will not be applicable to the standards for lieve that appointments are made based on merit the appointment of judges. Whereas complete trans- and not simply to stack the Court to render deci- parency with respect to the election of legislative rep- sions favourable to a ruling government. To resentatives is paramount to the integrity of that achieve this, some experts have suggested that any branch of a democratic system, a degree of significant system to choose judges for the Supreme Court of confidentiality in the assessment of candidates will Canada should include representatives of the likewise be paramount to the integrity of appoint- “general public.” While we very much agree that ments of the judiciary. Our third principle below the process must invoke the confidence of the provides further explanation of why something less general public, the BCCLA believes that this can than full transparency is appropriate for Court ap- be achieved without the inclusion of laypersons in pointments. the selection process. It is not clear how one would choose a layperson representative of the 3. The process must be one that preserves the “general public.” Furthermore, without some spe- integrity of the Court while promoting judicial independence and impartiality. cial expertise relevant to the task of selecting the best candidates, a layperson would contribute Judicial independence and impartiality are fundamen- very little to the process. Instead, we suggest that tal conditions for a true democracy in which the rule elected representatives are able to represent the of law is an underlying principle. As Chief Justice “general public” as they do with other matters of McLachlin stated in her address sponsored by the public concern. B.C. Civil Liberties Association: 11 BCCLA POSITION PAPER | APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA continued from page 11 ... judges are required by the most fundamental princi- ing on the requirement of an “independent and impar- ples of our legal tradition to remain independent and tial tribunal established by law” in article 6 of the impartial. Judges are not beholden to any particular European Convention for the Protection of Human interest or political party, much less to the Prime Min- Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, puts the distinc- ister who may have appointed them... The suggestion tion between independence and impartiality as follows: that judges ever disregard their obligation to rule in The often fine distinction between independence accordance with the law, that they decide on the basis and impartiality turns mainly, it seems, on that of their subjective preference, undermines this confi- between the status of the tribunal determinable dence, and should not be made lightly. The suggestion largely by objective tests and the subjective atti- that judges are pawns in elaborate political games or tudes of its members, lay or legal. Independence is serve the aims of one side or the other of the political primarily freedom from control by, or subordina- spectrum is equally destructive, and equally false. tion to, the executive power in the State; impartial- Thus, any process for appointments to the Court ity is rather absence in the members of the tribunal must ensure that the conditions of judicial independ- of personal interest in the issues to be determined ence and impartiality are sustained and protected. by it, or some form of prejudice. But what do the concepts of independence and In Re Remuneration of Judges (1997), the Court reit- impartiality represent and how are they relevant in erated Valente’s three core and necessary conditions concrete terms to the Court’s appointment process? required for judicial independence: security of tenure By way of background, two decisions of the Su- (removal only for cause after a judicial inquiry with an preme Court of Canada provide guidance. In Valente, opportunity to be heard), financial security (freedom the Court states that the purpose of judicial independ- from political interference through economic interfer- ence is, among other things, to ensure that courts can ence by legislature or executive), and institutional fulfill their fundamental responsibility as protectors independence (the freedom of judges and courts to “of the Constitution and the fundamental values em- administer their judicial responsibilities without inter- bodied in it — rule of law, fundamental justice, ference from the executive or legislative branches of equality, preservation of the democratic process, to government or political matters). name perhaps the most important” [at para.14]. The For the Court in Re Remuneration of Judges, the sepa- Court distinguishes impartiality from independence: ration of powers between the legislative, executive and A judge may be impartial in the sense that he has no judicial branches of government that exists in the Con- preconceived ideas or bias, actual or perceived, with- stitution of Canada is critical for ensuring judicial out necessarily being independent... Although there is independence and insulating the judiciary from politi- obviously a close relationship between independence cal influence: and impartiality, they are nevertheless separate and What is at issue here is the character of the relation- distinct values or requirements. Impartiality refers to ships between the legislature and the executive on the a state of mind or attitude of the tribunal in relation one hand, and the judiciary on the other. These rela- to the issues and the parties in a particular case. The tionships should be depoliticized. When I say that word “impartial” as Howland C.J.O. noted, connotes those relationships are depoliticized, I do not mean to absence of bias, actual or perceived. The word “inde- deny that they are political in the sense that court pendent” in s. 11(d) reflects or embodies the tradi- decisions (both constitutional and non-constitutional) tional constitutional value of judicial independence. often have political implications, and that the statutes As such, it connotes not merely a state of mind or which courts adjudicate upon emerge from the political attitude in the actual exercise of judicial functions, process. What I mean instead is the legislature and but a status or relationship to others, particularly to executive cannot, and cannot appear to, exert political the executive branch of government, that rests on pressure on the judiciary, and conversely, that mem- objective conditions or guarantees. bers of the judiciary should exercise reserve in speak- Fawcett, in The Application of the European Con- ing out publicly on issues of general public policy that 12 vention on Human Rights (1969), p. 156, comment- are or have the potential to come before the courts, that are the subject of political debate, and which do III. Options for Reform not relate to the proper administration of justice [at Common among many proposals for reform of the para.140, Court’s emphasis]. appointment process is that a select group of “experts” Thus, these principles both provide fodder for a and interests would convene to undertake the task of critique of the current system of Court appointments determining, at a minimum, who are the leading can- – the fear that the Prime Minister could use his almost didates or, at its most expansive, who should be cho- complete discretionary authority for purely partisan sen as the best candidate. Proposals differ in who and/or political ends – and for guidance for the crea- should participate on such a committee and, impor- tion of a new appointment process. In seeking to tantly, on whether candidates should be subject to a address at least the appearance of a potential problem public hearing. with the current system, it will be equally important The BCCLA believes that a formal advisory com- to create a process that respects the principle of mittee would provide an important, non-partisan “depoliticization”. continued on page 14

Muslim Voices Project

As part of our work to protect fundamental freedoms in the post-9/11 era, the BCCLA has launched a project with community partners to assist members of the Muslim and Arab communities to understand their rights and to reveal their stories about the impact of government actions and policies on their lives. The first stage of this project is an outreach effort to the Muslim community. To that end, BCCLA offi- cials have been visiting local Mosques during Friday prayers, the traditional gathering time for practicing Muslims, to introduce ourselves, provide information and offer assistance to those who wish to express concerns about mistreatment. Community leaders from various organizations have met to form a task force to work jointly with the BCCLA. Their effort will be crucial given the community’s relative lack of familiarity with the BCCLA, but also given the barriers to disclosure. Community partners in this project include: • B.C. Muslim Association • Islamic Information Centre • Pakistan-Canada Association • BCMA Women’s Council • Islamic Society of B.C. • Muslim Youth Centre • Muslim Women in Da’Wah Project objectives include: To encourage members of the Muslim community to express themselves with regard to: (a) concerns about mistreatment by government officials. (b) the impact of the post-September 11 world on their lives. • To identify and document barriers to members of the Muslim community revealing their stories, voicing concerns and making complaints. • To identify and document issues and agencies of concern to the community in respect of their rights and civil liberties. • To inform members of the community about their rights and procedures for enforcing their rights under the law. • To create a body of fact based information to inform recommendations about law and policy reform with respect to the review of anti-terrorism legislation, the Arar Inquiry, internal government policy and any other law or policy that impacts the Muslim community. • To provide assistance and representation to those individuals who wish to make complaints against government officials about allegations of mistreatment. If you know of anyone who has concerns, please encourage them to contact the BCCLA at 604-687-3013 and ask for Murray Mollard or Micheal Vonn. 13 BCCLA POSITION PAPER | APPOINTMENTS TO THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA continued from page 13 institution to ensure that the appointments are merito- this paper yet will each bring a different approach to rious. their judgments. Is it appropriate to delegate the But how would one choose individuals to sit on an choice among equal but different candidates to a com- advisory committee? Whatever the selection process mittee of un-elected members? On what basis will they for members of an advisory committee, this process make distinctions between candidates of equal but itself must ensure that members are not picked based different merit? If the difference between candidates is on partisan affiliations (other than Parliamentarians) one of “judicial perspective”, isn’t it more appropriate or to pursue partisan agendas. With this caveat in for elected, accountable officials to make this choice mind, we would support a process in which a variety than appointed members? of interested groups that are non-partisan should be The concern about both these propositions is that it left to choose the best representative to participate on takes us back to the arguments we introduced earlier a committee. For example, with respect to the judici- in this paper about politicization of the appointment ary, the Chief Justice of the provincial Court of Appeal process and judiciary. There is a real tension between and superior court could directly participate or del- being careful about not allowing a Prime Minister egate another judge to represent them. With respect to complete discretion to choose whomever they wish the legal community, one member from the Canadian without any constraints or safeguards for fear of out- Bar Association and local law society(ies) could name right politicization of the process, on the one hand, representatives. Parliamentarians would be repre- and acknowledging on the other that (a) there may be sented by individuals of both the government and a legitimate role for the Prime Minister in choosing an official opposition from the federal level and by gov- appointment given the policy role of the Court and (b) ernment representatives at the provincial level. there has to be some basis – and some legitimate au- thority – for distinguishing between otherwise equally IV. The Mandate of an Advisory Committee meritorious candidates. and the Role of the Prime Minister The resolution to this tension could be found in Should an advisory committee merely provide a short distinguishing between the responsibility of a true list of top candidates from which the Prime Minister advisory committee and the ultimate decision making or Executive could choose or should the committee responsibility for the Prime Minister, or Executive, pick the candidate? This question involves fairly com- with respect to an appointment. The advisory commit- tee’s role would thus be to determine the best leading plex considerations about democracy and the nature candidates based on merit and to advise the Prime of judicial review at the level of the Supreme Court of Minister about each candidate’s “judicial perspective” Canada. (i.e. set of values regarding judicial interpretation). In considering this question, it is important to ac- The advisory committee would presumably eliminate knowledge two important facts. First, the decisions of those candidates who simply see little or no role for the Supreme Court of Canada, prior to the Charter but judicial review – the worry expressed earlier in this even more so after its creation, have an important in- paper regarding those Court appointment reformists fluence on public policy in Canada. Given the Court’s who have little regard for the judicial branch of gov- significant public policy role, why shouldn’t the gov- ernment. Yet, they would presumably include candi- ernment of the day – which is elected to govern based dates who, as long as they meet the other merit crite- on certain public policy commitments – have consider- ria, are either “activist” or “deferential.” able influence on who is appointed to the Court? The advisory committee would work on a consensus Second, it is important to acknowledge that judges based model. All members of the committee would are unique individuals with unique perspectives about have to agree on the recommendations for a short list a judge’s role and differing theories about judicial submitted to the Prime Minister. Because the advisory interpretation and judicial review. Some judges may committee’s mandate will be to provide a short list of be seen as deferential to government, while others five or so top candidates, all of whom meet the mini- more interventionist. Thus, it is possible to have sev- mum but high standards of merit – not to recommend eral top candidates who each are highly meritorious only one individual – consensus should not be difficult 14 based on the criteria that we have discussed earlier in to achieve. The advantage of a consensus model is that it encourages decision makers to take seriously other stantive assistance to choosing the best candidate. At interests besides their own, including partisan interests worst, the hearings will provide a very public stage for if they have any, because they must agree to all candi- politicians to play politics with the appointment proc- dates on the short list. This is a further way the advi- ess, thus undermining judicial independence and im- sory committee will avoid becoming a partisan tool, partiality. thus promoting judicial independence and impartiality. From this short list, the Prime Minister would then VI. Conclusion choose the appointment according to his or her own The BCCLA supports reform to the Supreme Court of views about the kind of judicial perspective and exper- Canada appointment process as a matter of ensuring tise they wish to see added to the Court. the integrity of the Court and preserving judicial inde- The advisory committee should also include a chair- pendence and impartiality. By the same token, the person who will have organizational support to act as a BCCLA opposes parliamentary confirmation hearings secretariat to coordinate the operation of the commit- as a threat to judicial independence. Instead, the Asso- tee. We believe that the chairperson should be the ciation recommends the creation of an advisory com- Clerk of the Privy Council. The Clerk and his staff’s mittee of experts to assess the relative merits of top role is to provide non-partisan advice to the Prime candidates who would then recommend the best op- Minister and Cabinet. The Clerk of the Privy Council is tions to the Prime Minister for final selection. The the head of the public service and responsible for BCCLA believes that a formal advisory committee smooth transitions between different governments. would provide an important, non-partisan institution to ensure that the appointments are meritorious. V. Public Hearings In considering more carefully the idea of public hear- Time for Liberty Campaign ings, it is not apparent what such hearings would ac- complish. An axiom of judicial decision making is that The following law firms and lawyers, champions of civil liber- a judge lets a decision she has written speak for itself. ties and corporate good citizens, have made donations as part Thus, it is not appropriate for parliamentarians to ask of our ongoing Time For Liberty pledge campaign this year. The potential candidates or a nominee to comment on a BCCLA will be better able to continue our vital support of civil particular case. Nor would a nominee answer such liberties because of their important commitment. questions. Again, a nominee’s theory of judicial review Baker & Corson Gottschau Law Corp should be evident by their past judgments. The only Black, Gropper & Co. Gourlay Spencer Wade exception would be for candidates who come directly Blake, Cassells and Graydon Guy Holeksa Law Corp. from private practice (Justices Binnie and Sopinka for Brooks Vinall Associates Kambas Galbraith example) or the academic world (Justice Bastarache), Collins & Cullen Lawson Lundell but in each of these cases, such candidates will have Crossin & Coristine McCarthy Tetrault Foundation likely written or given public speeches on topics of Desroches & Co Nathanson, Schacter and interest to a selection committee. Finally, it will not be Dosanjh Wooley Thompson appropriate for an MP to ask a nominee’s personal Fasken Martineau DuMoulin Taylor Jordan Chafetz values with respect to issues like abortion or the death Fiorillo & Glavin Tim Louis & Company penalty, nor would a nominee answer such questions. Gardiner & Co Vick, McPhee & Liu Law Corp. Though a public hearing involving the Minister of If you would like to join the Time for Liberty campaign, Justice and possibly the chair of a selection committee please contact BCCLA Development Officer Tom Sandborn at would not create the problems as outlined above, again 604-224-1182 or [email protected]. Corporate donations from it is not clear what is to be gained by this type of hear- businesses outside the legal community are also welcome, of ing in substantive terms. In sum, there is little to be course, as are individual gifts. You can use the handy donor gained in substantive terms in determining the best form that comes with this issue of the Democratic Commit- candidate to appoint to the Court through the use of ment to begin or extend your support for liberty through a public hearings. At best, they provide a modicum of an donation today. We thank you in advance for your help. appearance of “accountability” with little if any sub- 15 WHAT’S NEW AT THE ASSOCIATION

IN MEMORIUM Board Update Remembering BCCLA Michael Feld has joined the BCCLA Board of Directors. Mr. Feld has recently retired Board Member John Cox from the Department of Philosophy at the University of Manitoba. 1932-2004 The Association also wishes to congratulate long-time BCCLA Board member and past President Philip Bryden on his appointment as the Dean of the Faculty of We are saddened to report that long- Law at the University of New Brunswick in Fredericton. Phil has been a professor of time BCCLA Board Member and Ex- law at UBC for the past twenty years. Phil first joined the BCCLA Board in 1985. He ecutive board member John Cox was President from 1990-1993. Over his almost twenty years of involvement in the passed away on May 14th at age 72. BCCLA, Phil has been one of the Board’s most respected and influential Directors. John was a valued member of the Successive Presidents and Executive Directors regularly turned to him for advice board for many years. He came to us on the most difficult issues. In turn, Phil was always ready to provide what would in 1985 while working as a media inevitably be sage direction. He will be missed. relations officer for the provincial The BCCLA extends its best wishes to Phil Bryden and his family, wife Cindy and government. He served on our fi- sons Colin and David, in their move to Atlantic Canada and we offer our deepest nance committee for many years, and thanks for all his efforts over the years on behalf of the BCCLA and civil liberties. served as Treasurer during a time of substantial financial growth for the Staff Update organization. He was also a link for The Association is pleased to announce that Micheal Vonn has joined the office as the BCCLA to the Unitarian Church. the new Policy Director. She replaces Kirk Tousaw who decided to return to Detroit John was a kind, thoughtful person to continue practicing law. Micheal recently completed and was often a welcome moderating articles at union-side labour law firm Victory Square influence in board meetings. We will Law Office and has extensive experience in a variety of miss him and extend our sympathy to fields, most notably her work in education and ethics his wife Joan and his family. in HIV/AIDS. Ms. Vonn is the former Chair of AIDS Vancouver. UNITED WAY DONATIONS Thanks in part to a grant from Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, the Association is also fortunate to have Sarom Bahk as a summer law student. Ms. Bahk comes highly recommended from the Dean of the Faculty of Law at McGill University in Policy Director Micheal Vonn Photo: Dominic Schaefer .

Don't forget that you can designate the BCCLA as a specific recipient of your United Way donation!

WE’RE MOVING

On or before September 1st, the BC Civil Liberties Association will be moving to: The B.C. Civil Liberties Association wishes to thank the Law Foundation of B.C. for its generous, ongoing support for our core programs. #550 - 1188 W. Georgia (at Bute) Vancouver B.C. BC Gaming Policy and Enforcement V6E 4A2 Branch of the Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General