Dear colleagues, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today as part of your study examining the protection of freedom of expression in Canadian society. I have been following your deliberations with great interest.

In my brief time with you today, I would like to share a recent illustrative case study that highlights many of the issues you have been studying with respect to the rights and responsibilities related to freedom of expression, the impacts of discrimination and its consequences for community safety, well-being and inclusion.

This case study highlights the concerning and increasing rise in hatred directed towards the 2SLGBTQIA+ community and the City of Calgary’s Safe and Inclusive Access Bylaw, passed in 2023, which is designed to create safe and inclusive access to city libraries and recreational facilities. These have become frequent targets for anti-2SLGBTQIA+ protests against drag queen or “rainbow storytime” events and gender-inclusiveness. The City of Calgary’s general manager of community services indicated that 21 planned protests targeted the Calgary community, with a dozen focused on public libraries and recreational facilities. Several planned events at these locations had to be cancelled out of concern for participants' safety.

The main focus of the City of Calgary’s bylaw stipulates that a person may not engage in protest activities on publicly accessible property within 100 metres of an entrance to a recreation facility or library, and may not impede or attempt to impede access to or from an entrance. This prohibition is in force one hour before and one hour after normal operational hours, or at differing hours for special events.

The legality of this bylaw was very recently challenged in the Alberta Court of Justice in response to a bylaw infraction ticket issued to an accused on April 15, 2023. He had engaged in a protest at the Calgary Public Library’s “reading with royalty” drag storytime event and was found to be within 100 metres of the library entrance. The accused used a bullhorn to amplify his voice and displayed a sign stating that “transgenders are perverts”. He had previously stated that such events are used to groom, exploit and traffic children. The accused also admitted to conducting similar protests at other libraries but had been deemed to be outside the 100-metre no-protest zone and was not charged with a bylaw infraction in those instances.

In the accused's statement of defence, he makes several claims as to the legal authority and validity of the city bylaw, which include his belief that the bylaw violates subsection 2(a), subsection 2(b), subsection 2(c) and section 7 of the charter. The city conceded that the bylaw violated subsection 2(a) and subsection 2(b) but denied any violation of subsection 2(c) or section 7.

Because of my limited time here with you today, I will focus my comments on whether the bylaw was found to be in violation of subsection 2(b) and the accused’s freedom of expression.

Ultimately, the court found that the bylaw did violate subsection 2(b) but was saved under section 1 as a reasonable limitation on the accused’s freedom of expression, based on similar legal precedents, such as exclusion zones or bubble zones established to support access to abortion services. These were ruled to be legal by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, and twice more by the B.C. Court of Appeal.

At this point, I should identify that before I was appointed to the Senate of Canada, the City of Calgary tenured me to produce an expert report in my capacity as the Canada research chair for the public understanding of sexual and gender minority youth. As summarized in the court decision, my expert report provided evidence that exposure to anti-2SLGBTQIA+ speech, signage, messaging, etc. outside public facilities such as libraries and recreational facilities and pools can have the following detrimental impacts: increased hypervigilance and minority stress; compromised mental and physical health; invalidation of 2SLGBTQIA+ identities and communities; contribution to post-traumatic stress and other negative coping mechanisms; distrust of law enforcement, government and civic institutions; avoidance of public spaces, recreation, community facilities, programs, events and support due to fears of anticipatory prejudice, violence, intimidation and discrimination; and (g) an erosion of a sense of belonging, community connectedness and social cohesion.

On November 26, 2024, the Honourable Justice Barley stated in his decision that the City of Calgary's Safe and Inclusive Access Bylaw addresses “a valid and important social issue” and that the community could suffer “significant psychological harm” if subjected to protesters objecting to their sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

Transcript

Discussions (0)