Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

2015 Annual Report

Defending the Constitutional Freedoms of Canadians

#253, 7620 Elbow Drive SW, Calgary, AB • T2V 1K2Phone: (403) 475-3622

www.JCCF.ca

© 2016 Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

Contents

Letter from the President and Chairman of the Board 1

Victory for Voices of the Nations 2

B.C. Civil Liberties Association and Cam Cote v. University of Victoria 3

UAlberta Pro-Life v. University of Alberta 3

Trinity Western University v. Law Society of British Columbia 4

Trinity Western University v. Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society 5

Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada 5

McLeod v. Mount Royal University 6

American Freedom Defense Initiative v. City of Edmonton 6

Allen v. Alberta 7

Kisilowsky v. Manitoba 8

Publications and Reports 9

Speaking Engagements 11

Educating Students 12

2015 Essay Contest 13

Published Columns and Media Coverage 13

About the Justice Centre 15

Board of Directors and Advisory Council 16

1

In October of 2015, the Justice Centre celebrated its fifth anniversary of facilitating access to justice through public interest litigation for all Canadians regardless of political persuasion. We are grateful for the faithful and generous support of thousands of Canadians from coast to coast, which has made possible our success in defend-ing the constitutional freedoms of Canadians. Notable accomplishments in the past five years include:

• Winning a court victory for campus free speech in Wilson v. University of Calgary. The Court set asidethe University’s decision to find seven students guilty of non-academic misconduct for having peacefullyexpressed their opinions on campus. This hard-fought victory now serves as an important precedent foruniversity students across Canada who choose to stand up for their free expression rights.

• Winning a victory for free expression in McLeod v. Mount Royal University, with the University presidentpublicly apologizing for the conduct of campus security guards who arrested, hand-cuffed, and detainedan individual for distributing literature on campus that they considered “offensive.”

• Producing and publishing the Campus Freedom Index each year, measuring the state of free speech atover 50 Canadian public universities, and more than a dozen legal research papers on conscience rights,parental rights in education and other constitutional issues.

• Successfully defending freedom of expression and religion for Voices of the Nations, a multi-culturalChristian group denied access to Toronto’s Yonge-Dundas Square for its annual music festival.

• Helping to secure victories for Charter freedoms in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court and in the SupremeCourt of British Columbia, by advocating for freedom of association in relation to Trinity Western Uni-versity’s court actions against provincial Law Societies.

In 2015 the Justice Centre advanced nine litigation files—our busiest caseload to date. We have also surpassed our records from previous years regarding the number of written publications, speaking engagements, educa-tional events, published columns and media coverage. With two full-time staff lawyers, Jay Cameron and Marty Moore, the Justice Centre is positioned to take on even more public interest cases to facilitate access to justice for all Canadians, regardless of their culture or ideology.

The Justice Centre’s growth in five years has positioned us to be Canada’s leading defender of constitutional freedoms. We highlight our 2015 activities and achievements in this report.

Yours for freedom and justice,

Letter from the President and Chairman of the Board

Daniel MolChairman of the Board of Directors

John Carpay President

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report

2

Victory for Voices of the Nations

In October 2015, the City of Toronto’s Yonge-Dundas Square (YDS) Board of Management denied Voices of the Nations (VOTN) its right to continue using Yonge-Dundas Square for its annual musical festival.

VOTN describes its mission as “to provide a venue and unite the various denominations, cultures and the out-standing talents within the Christian community” and “to embrace and celebrate the wonderful diversity in the city.” Held the first weekend in August, this annual festival showcases the talents of numerous performing groups and artists from a broad cross-section of the Christian community.

Natalie Belman, the Manager of Events for Yonge-Dundas Square told VOTN that their festival had violated the YDS policy against “proselytizing”, saying: “it doesn’t matter if it’s speaking or singing. Either way, if you’re praising Jesus or ‘praise the Lord’ and ‘there’s no God like Jehovah,’ that type of thing, that’s proselytizing.”

The Justice Centre sent a legal warning letter to the YDS Board, and made oral presentations before it, explaining that the decision to ban VOTN violated the freedoms of religion and expression as protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

On February 4, 2016, the YDS Board of Management reversed its decision to ban VOTN from Yonge-Dundas Square. The Board directed that a permit be granted to VOTN to host its annual concert in Yonge-Dundas Square on August 6, 2016.

The YDS policies, including its policy against “proselytizing”, are currently under review. The YDS Board has agreed to consider the Justice Centre’s submissions that the prohibition against “proselytizing” is unconstitution-al as it undertakes its policy review.

This significant out-of-court victory benefits all Canadians.

Voices of the Nations hosts an annual multicultural Christian music festival, with numerous different performers, in Toronto’s Yonge-Dundas Square.

B.C. Civil Liberties Association and Cam Cote v. University of Victoria The Justice Centre was granted intervenor status in this court action over the rights of university students to ex-press unpopular beliefs on campus. The B.C. Court of Appeal heard the Justice Centre’s oral argument in Feb-ruary 2016, presented by Victoria lawyer Frank Falzon.

This case arose in 2013, when the UVic pro-life student club Youth Protecting Youth (YPY) was granted approv-al by the University administration to conduct a small, peaceful demonstration on campus, involving students holding pro-life signs, handing out pamphlets, and en-gaging fellow students in conversation. The day prior to this event, UVic suddenly withdrew its approval inform-ing club president Cam Cote that YPY could not proceed with expressing its opinions on campus.

In the court, the Justice Centre argued that UVic is a public body, subject to administrative law principles, in-cluding the requirement to give great weight to the free expression rights of all students. Whether the Charter applies to universities or not, the University does not have unfettered discretion to censor the peaceful expres-sion of opinion on campus.

UAlberta Pro-Life v. University of Alberta The Justice Centre is representing members of a small student pro-life club at the University of Alberta in a court action to defend freedom of expression on campus.

In March 2015, a mob of University of Alberta students used Facebook to publicize their plans to obstruct and disrupt a peaceful pro-life display, a campus event authorized by the University. Dr. Indira Samarasekera, then-President of the University, publicly warned that interfering or disrupting this University-related function would violate the Code of Student Behaviour. Advocating for illegal behaviour and for violation of the Code is also prohibited by the Code.

The campus club, UAlberta Pro-Life, provided the University with copies of the Facebook internet posts, in which the Code-violators publicly identified themselves. The University took no action to warn these students to desist from their illegal plans and behaviour. The mob proceeded to blockade the peaceful event with sheets, towels, banners and posters, using a bullhorn and chants to prevent any civilized discussion or debate from tak-ing place. University of Alberta Protective Services (UAPS) stood by and watched, taking no action to uphold the rule of law on campus. Even after the campus club filed formal complaints and presented campus security with numerous photographs, Facebook posts and witness statements, the University has refused to prosecute any of the students who clearly violated the Code of Student Behaviour.

3

Justice Centre President John Carpay be-side statue of Justitia, the Roman goddess of Justice, in the courtyard of the Vancou-ver courthouse.

The 2013 Campus Freedom Index

Instead of enforcing its own Code, and protecting the freedom of all students to peacefully express their opinions on campus, the University recently presented UAlberta Pro-Life with a $17,500 "security fee" that would need to be paid if the club wanted to hold another campus event. In a court action against the University of Alberta, the Justice Centre challenges both the University’s refusal to prosecute Code-violators as well as the speech-censoring $17,500 security fee.

Trinity Western University v. Law Society of British Columbia The law societies of B.C., Ontario and Nova Scotia have refused to recognize the law program of Trinity Western University (TWU), a private Evangelical Christian university in Langley, BC. These three Law Societies admit without hesitation that TWU’s law program meets all academic requirements and professional standards. Their objection is based solely on TWU’s code of conduct (the “Community Covenant”), which is based on traditional Christian moral principles. The Community Covenant prohibits drunkenness, foul language, viewing pornogra-phy, gossip and sex outside of the marriage of one man and one woman. The Community Covenant is such that many (and probably most) Canadian university students would choose not to attend TWU. As the Supreme Court of Canada stated in 2001 in TWU v. BC College of Teachers: “TWU is not for everybody.”

The Law Societies claim that TWU “discriminates against gays and lesbians”. This claim is a half-truth. TWU discriminates against anyone and everyone who, for any reason, does not wish to abide by the Community Cov-enant. This “discrimination” is what every voluntary association engages in: people who disagree with a group’s beliefs, goals, rules or practices will not feel welcome to join that group. Canada has tens of thousands of chari-table, ethnic, cultural, educational, religious, political, community, recreational and linguistic associations, which together create the real diversity that is the hallmark of a free society. Each of these voluntary associations “dis-criminates” against those who disagree with the group’s aims and purpose. Straight people who want to be sexu-ally active outside of marriage, or engage in any other activity prohibited by the Community Covenant, would not choose to attend TWU. For the Law Societies to claim that TWU has somehow “singled out” gays and lesbians for “discrimination” is absurd and misleading.

4

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report

A mob of protesters obstruct the March 2015 display by UAlberta Pro-Life.

The Justice Centre has been granted intervenor status in TWU’s court actions in B.C., Ontario and Nova Scotia against the three provincial Law Societies, to argue specifically for freedom of association as protected by section 2(d) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The Justice Centre filed written arguments in all three court actions and presented oral argument in Vancouver, Toronto and Halifax, and has also been granted intervenor status at the Court of Appeal in each of those provinces.

On December 10, 2015, the B.C. Supreme Court ruled in favour of TWU, striking down the Law Society’s rejec-tion of TWU’s law program. The Law Society of B.C. has appealed this decision, and a ruling from the B.C. Court of Appeal is expected in 2016.

Trinity Western University in Langley, B.C.

Trinity Western University v. Nova Scotia Barristers’ Society The Justice Centre presented written and then oral argument in support of freedom of association before the Su-preme Court of Nova Scotia, which in January 2015 ruled against the Nova Scotia Barrister’s Society.

Justice Campbell acknowledged that some may experience “outrage, emotional pain, minority stress, or hurt feel-ings” from knowing that a graduate of a private Christian university in B.C. can become a lawyer in Nova Scotia. But this does not provide the Barrister’ Society with any grounds to violate the Charter-protected fundamental freedoms of Canadians. Further, Justice Campbell found that the Barristers’ Society’s action against TWU “was not designed to minimally impair the freedom of religion and freedom of conscience.” The Charter cannot be transformed into “a tool in the hands of the state to enforce moral conformity with approved values.”

This victory benefits all Canadians, by preserving the right of every charity, ethnic and cultural association, sports club, temple, church, and political group to establish its own rules and membership requirements. This pro-free-dom ruling has been appealed, and a decision from the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal is expected in 2016.

Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper CanadaIn contrast to the pro-freedom decisions issues by courts in BC and Nova Scotia, the Ontario Divisional Court in July 2015 upheld the decision of the Law Society of Upper Canada to refuse to recognize TWU’s law program. TWU has appealed this ruling, and a decision from the Ontario Court of Appeal is expected in 2016. The Justice Centre has been granted intervenor status in these TWU cases before the Courts of Appeal of BC, Ontario and Nova Scotia, and is presenting written and oral argument in 2016.

5

McLeod v. Mount Royal UniversityFrom 2013 to 2015, the Justice Centre represent-ed Nicholas McLeod in his claim against Mount Royal University (“MRU”) in Calgary. In Feb-ruary 2013, Nicholas was peacefully distributing pro-life literature in a building on campus when confronted by an MRU security guard, who or-dered Nicholas to stop immediately, because the security guard considered the literature to be “of-fensive.” Nicholas initially refused to stop dis-tributing his pamphlets, but then agreed to leave on condition that he could retrieve his jacket from a locker, as it was a very cold winter eve-ning. Four or more security guards tried to force Nicholas to leave the building without permitting him to retrieve his jacket, which was in a nearby locker. The security guards assaulted Nicholas, forced him to the ground, hand-cuffed him, and confined him to a small room for several hours with his hands still cuffed painfully behind his back. Nicholas had video-recorded the incident on his cell phone, but one of the MRU security guards removed the SD memory card from Nicholas’ cell phone. That guard was later charged with theft, and admitted in court to having taken this crucial evidence, which recorded the security guards’ wrong-doing.

On behalf of Nicholas, the Justice Centre requested an apology from MRU, appropriate compensation for physi-cal and psychological suffering endured by Nicholas and revisions to campus security policies and training. MRU rejected this proposal in its entirety, making court action necessary.

In March 2015, the court action settled without continuing further to trial. MRU president Dr. David Docherty apologized to Nicholas for the behaviour of MRU security guards, their unnecessary use of force, the unlawful detention and the violation of Charter rights. In his letter of apology, Dr. Docherty stated that “supplemental training will be conducted to ensure that community officers understand the interaction between the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and their duties in maintaining a safe campus environment.”

American Freedom Defense Initiative v. City of EdmontonThe Justice Centre is representing a non-profit human rights advocacy group in a court action against the City of Edmonton. The City cancelled bus advertisements that opposed the "honour killings" of women and girls by their own families, in response to complaints about the ads.

In October of 2013, the American Freedom Defence Initiative ran ads on Edmonton Transit buses reading “Mus-lim Girls Honor Killed By Their Families”, showing photos of Aqsa Parvez and six other women, murdered for choosing to live by Western values like women’s equality. The rest of the ad read “Is your family threatening you? Is there a fatwa on your head? We can help: go to FightforFreedom.us”.

6

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report

Mount Royal University’s West Gate entrance, in Calgary, Alberta.

7

This FightforFreedom.us ad appeared on Edmonton transit buses briefly, before the City ordered it removed.

So-called “honour killings” occur when a woman is considered to have sullied the family’s honour through some sexual indiscretion, or even perceived immodesty. Aqsa Parvez was only 16 when she was strangled to death for refusing to wear a hijab. Aqsa’s brother and father felt that not wearing a head scarf dishonoured the family, so they killed Aqsa in her own home in Mississauga, on December 10, 2007, to restore the family’s "honour". This case against the City of Edmonton for removing the ad is important for preserving free expression rights in the public square. The trial of this matter is set to occur in the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench in September 2016.Allen v. Alberta Dr. Darcy Allen practiced as a dentist in Okotoks, Alberta, until severe and continuous back pain forced him to stop working. Dr. Allen suffered in pain for years on waiting lists in the Alberta government’s health care monop-oly, until he finally added another mortgage to his house to pay for the medically necessary surgery in Montana in 2009. Unable to work, enjoy life, or perform simple tasks like grocery shopping or tying his shoelaces, Dr. Allen’s pain was so severe that even with the strongest pain-killers, all he could do was lie on his bed, or on the floor, in a state of severe pain.

Every province has laws which make it difficult if not impossible for Canadians to access essential health care outside of a government monopoly. Long wait lists force patients to suffer pain, and to risk irreparable damage to health. In some cases patients die while waiting for surgery. Prevented by law from buying private health in-surance to access health services outside of the government’s monopoly, Canadians like Darcy Allen are forced to choose between taking out a second mortgage (if they can) to obtain care outside of Canada, or suffer for months – even years – on painful wait lists.

In a complex and nuanced ruling in 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada struck down Quebec’s ban on private health insurance in Chaoulli v. Quebec, stating that “access to a waiting list is not access to health care.” The Court ruled that banning citizens from accessing health care outside of the government’s monopoly violated the Charter right to “life, liberty and security of the person.” The Court was split evenly as to whether this ban is justified.

Dr. Allen sought to extend the Chaoulli ruling to Alberta. His ultimate goal was to ask the Supreme Court to re-visit its Chaoulli ruling, and render a clearer decision that would empower Canadians with the right to access essential health care outside of the government’s monopoly system.

Unfortunately, the trial judge ignored the large volume of evidence that was placed before him. The evidence

made it abundantly clear that Dr. Allen and many other patients in Alberta suffer pain and risk death while wait-ing for medically necessary surgery. These were the same facts that were established in Chaoulli. The Alberta Government readily admitted that patients suffer on lengthy wait lists, and provided studies, reports and statistics showing this to be true. Further, Alberta’s ban on private health insurance was nearly identical to the Quebec ban which had been struck down by the Supreme Court in Chaoulli.

In short, in the Chaoulli and Allen cases, both the facts and the law were essentially the same.

Nevertheless, the Alberta Court of Appeal upheld the trial decision, and joined the lower court in ignoring the fun-damental similarity, in fact and in law, between the Chaoulli and Allen cases. The Court suggested that Dr. Allen should have paid for expert reports, and retained expert witnesses, to prove what he had already proven, namely: many Albertans suffer on wait lists in the government’s health care monopoly. Following the Court’s reasoning, a Canadian cannot assert her or his Charter rights without raising and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on a lengthy and complex trial.

The Supreme Court of Canada has refused to hear a further appeal. While this is very disappointing, it must be remembered that no province is constitutionally required to create, by law, a government monopoly over health care. Provinces are free to legalize private health insurance, and also repeal other laws which inflict pain and suffering on patients by restricting their freedom to access health care outside of the government’s monopoly. The democratic process is available to citizens, to improve and repeal unjust laws like these.

Justice Centre President John Carpay with Okotoks dentist Darcy Allen, at the Law Courts in Calgary.

Kisilowsky v. Manitoba The Justice Centre is representing a former Manitoba Marriage Commissioner, Kevin Kisilowsky, who lost his licence to perform marriages after he indicated that he was unable to perform same-sex ceremonies due to his religious beliefs. Apart from Mr. Kisilowsky and a very small number of other marriage commissioners, almost all of Manitoba’s more than 1,000 marriage commissioners are willing and able to provide same-sex ceremonies. There is no practi-

8

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report

9

cal need for Manitoba to require each and every marriage commissioner to be willing to provide this service. Mr. Kisilowsky is asking only that the government provide reasonable accommodation for him, as other provinces have done for their marriage commissioners, without imposing hardship on any party. This case will be heard in September 2016.

Publications and ReportsSince its founding in 2010, the Justice Centre has published thirteen reports, including our annual Campus Free-dom Index as well as papers addressing our Charter freedoms of expression, religion, conscience, and associa-tion. The following publications were released in 2015:

1) Refusing to Refer: Charterprotection for physicianconscience rights —submitted to College ofPhysicians and Surgeons ofManitoba

2) 2015 Campus Freedom Index:measuring the state of freespeech at 55 Canadian publicuniversities

Marriage Commissioner Kevin Kisiloswky lost his licence to perform marriages after

indicating he was unable to perform same-sex ceremonies due to his religious beliefs.

10

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report

3) Mandatory Gay-Straight Alliances versus Charter freedoms: An analysis of Alberta’s Bill 10 in light of the Supreme Court of Canada ruling in Loyola v. Quebec

4) In Defence of Charter Freedoms: A legal analysis of the constitutionality of the “Policy — Conscientious Refusal,” submitted to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan

5) In Defence of Charter Freedoms: A legal analysis of the constitutionality of the policy, “Professional Obligations and Human Rights,” submitted to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario

11

Speaking EngagementsIn 2015, the Justice Centre received sixteen invitations to speak at conferences, functions and events:

February 4, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — lecture on constitutional law presented by John Carpay to journalism stu-dents at the Southern Alberta Institute of Technology.

April 23, 2015: Airdrie, Alberta — forum on the Supreme Court ruling in Carter (physician-assisted suicide) and Charter section 2(a) conscience rights.

April 28, 2015: Medicine Hat, Alberta — public forum on how Bill 10 threatens religious freedom and parental rights in education, followed by question-and-answer session.

May 27, 2015: Edmonton, Alberta — public forum on how Bill 10 threatens religious freedom and parental rights in education, followed by question-and-answer session.

June 12, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — meeting with staff and interns at the Manning Centre for Building Democracy, discussing the importance of resisting current cultural trends that undermine freedom and the free society.

June 13, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — presentation at Christian Medical and Dental Society annual conference about the Justice Centre’s court action in support of access to health care, Allen v. Alberta.

July 19, 2015: High River, Alberta — Town Hall meeting to discuss property rights and the free society, in relation to RCMP conduct in 2013, namely unlawful entry into homes and unlawful seizure of citizens’ property without warrant and without justification.

August 23, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — youth conference of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation to train student leaders on successful campus activism, with Justice Centre presenting on how the law protects the peaceful ex-pression of opinions at universities.

September 23, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — forum on the Supreme Court ruling in Carter (physician-assisted sui-cide) and Charter section 2(a) conscience rights.

September 24, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — forum on the Supreme Court ruling in Carter (physician-assisted sui-cide) and Charter section 2(a) conscience rights.

September 26, 2015: Toronto, Ontario — Daniel Santoro on the Justice Centre’s Board of Directors, argues in favour of accreditation for Trinity Western Law School at the Federation of Asian Canadian Lawyers conference.

October 6, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — forum on the Supreme Court ruling in Carter (physician-assisted suicide) and Charter section 2(a) conscience rights.

October 7, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — forum on the Supreme Court ruling in Carter (physician-assisted suicide) and Charter section 2(a) conscience rights.

November 4, 2015: Windsor, Ontario — lecture on public interest litigation presented by John Carpay to political science students in University of Windsor Legal Process class.

November 14, 2015: Montreal, Quebec — presentation to the Canadian Students for Liberty Regional Conference about free expression on campus

November 28, 2015: Calgary, Alberta — presentation to students and activists at Generation Screwed Calgary conference

12

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report

Educating StudentsWorking together with local student clubs, the Justice Centre has sponsored “free speech wall” and “free speech ball” events at more than a dozen campuses across Canada. The “free speech wall” is a large, stand-alone “wall” made of wood and covered in paper, on which students can express their opinions on subjects of their own choosing.

In 2015, the Justice Centre sponsored free speech events at McGill University and Dalhousie University. These activities prompted much discussion on these campuses about the importance of free expression, and helped draw attention to the free speech records of the university and student union administrations.

The Justice Centre hosted free speech wall and free speech ball events at McGill and Dalhousie University.

13

2015 Essay ContestThe Justice Centre provides students with educational opportunities to engage with the concepts of freedom and justice. To achieve this, the Justice Centre held its first national essay contest in 2013, inviting submissions on the question: “Positive rights versus negative rights: which should prevail, and why?”

Continuing this pursuit, the Justice Centre crafted a new question for its 2014 contest, “With only a minority of Canadians attending a place of worship regularly, is it important to preserve freedom of conscience and religion in Canada’s increasingly secularized society? Why or why not?”

In 2015, the Justice Centre paid tribute to the Magna Carta upon its 800th anniversary. The Magna Carta laid the groundwork for many of the fundamental rights and freedoms which Canadians have traditionally enjoyed, for example: the rule of law, through which all people (including the King) are subject to law; private property rights; trial by jury; and habeas corpus. Many of these Magna Carta principles are now under sustained attack, which is why the Justice Centre works hard to defend them.

To celebrate the 800th anniversary of this historic document, the Justice Centre asked students: “To what extent have Canadians abandoned the principles and liberties of the Magna Carta? If Magna Carta freedoms have been lost, what must Canadians do to regain them, and to preserve existing ones?”More than 200 students have sub-mitted essays to these contests since the project began in 2013. The Justice Centre continues to engage with these students through our communications, campus outreach initiatives and other activities.

Published Columns and Media CoverageThe Justice Centre in 2015 saw the publication of 29 columns in the Globe and Mail, National Post, and ten other major dailies across Canada, in addition to 137 print, radio, and television interviews and media mentions. This is part of the Justice Centre’s ongoing effort to educate the Canadian public about the importance of constitutional freedoms to preserving our free society.

Here follows the Justice Centre’s columns published in 2015:

• Health monopoly plain unhealthy — Calgary Sun, November 19, 2015

• Silencing Voices of the Nations in Yonge-Dundas Square is a “dagger in the heart of free expression” —Toronto Sun, November 7, 2015

• On free speech, our universities get an ‘F’ — National Post, October 31, 2015

• Universities that censor end up paying in court — Huffington Post, October 16, 2015

• Rule of law at stake in court action against U of A — Edmonton Sun, October 14, 2015

• Health care, and justice, denied — National Post, September 14, 2015

• The Bar Association doesn’t speak for all — National Post, August 12, 2015

• Lawyers have as much right as anyone to criticize issues — Daily Gleaner, August 12, 2015

14

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report

• Legal eagles should not dis their own — Innisfail Province, August 11, 2015

• Legal eagles should not dis their own — Didsbury Review, August 11, 2015

• Why Alberta’s Law Society should drop Levant’s case — Globe and Mail, July 30, 2015

• Ontario court repudiates freedom of association — Timmins Daily Press, July 18, 2015

• LSUC is attacking Charter freedoms — Huffington Post, Aug 5, 2015

• A harsh blow against freedom of association — Globe and Mail, July 6, 2015

• University of Alberta vs. free speech — National Post, June 29, 2015

• The BC Law Society is the one breaching the Charter — The Province, June 19, 2015

• Why bother picking on TWU law? — Kelowna Daily Courier, May 28, 2015

• Every voluntary association discriminates so why pick on Trinity Western? — Daily Gleaner, May 28, 2015

• Why pick on Trinity Western? — Stratford Beacon-Herald, May 26, 2015

• Every voluntary association discriminates so why pick on Trinity Western? — Battlefords News Optimist, May 26, 2015

• McLeod v. Mount Royal University a simple matter of freedom — Calgary Sun, Apr 24, 2015

• Get set for Loyola West — National Post, April 22, 2015

• The law’s a sham — National Post, April 7, 2015

• Prentice should honour fixed election law — Calgary Herald, April 2, 2015

• Alberta’s Bill 10 leaves parents powerless in deciding their child’s education — Calgary Sun, March 24, 2015

• Universities are buying ‘peace’ by condoning mob censorship — National Post, March 11, 2015

• Imposing moral beliefs on children through a ‘one-size-fits-all’ curriculum — National Post, March 9, 2015

• An attack on the conscience rights of physicians — National Post, February 20, 2015

• Trinity Western ruling protects the freedoms of all Canadians — Globe and Mail, Jan. 30, 2015

15

About the Justice CentreThe free and democratic society which the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms holds out as our ideal can only be fulfilled by honouring and preserving Canada’s heritage of freedom of expression, freedom of religion, freedom of association, constitutionally limited government, the equality of all citizens before the law and the rule of law. And yet these core principles of freedom and equality continue to be eroded by governments, and by governmental entities like Canada’s public universities, human rights commissions and provincial law societies.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms was founded in 2010 with the mission of advancing and promot-ing the core principles of freedom and equality through education and litigation. The Justice Centre’s vision is for a Canada where:

o each and every Canadian is treated equally by governments and by the courts, regardless of race, ances-try, ethnicity, age, gender, beliefs, or other personal characteristics;

o all Canadians are free to express peacefully their thoughts, opinions and beliefs without fear of persecu-tion or oppression;

o every person has the knowledge and the perseverance to control his or her own destiny as a free and re-sponsible member of our society;

o all Canadians have the understanding and determination to recognize, protect and preserve their human rights and constitutional freedoms; and,

o all Canadians can enjoy individual freedom as responsible members of a free society.

The Justice Centre is a registered charity (charitable registration number 817174865- RR0001) and issues offi-cial tax receipts to donors for donations of $50 or more. The Justice Centre is funded entirely by the voluntary donations of freedom-minded Canadians who agree with the Justice Centre’s goals, mission, vision and activ-ities. The Justice Centre is independent and non-partisan, and receives no funding from any government or government organization. The Justice Centre’s financial statements and independent Auditor’s Report are posted on our website.

Board of Directors and Advisory CouncilThe Justice Centre is governed by a Board of Directors:

• Timothy Boyle, Lawyer, Spier Harben LLP (Calgary, AB)• Bruce Hallsor, Managing Partner, Crease Harman LLP (Victoria, BC)• Daniel Mol (Chairman), Lawyer, (Edmonton, AB)• Dr. Marco Navarro-Genie, President, Atlantic Institute for Market Studies (Halifax, NS)• Dr. Dwight Newman, Professor of Law, University of Saskatchewan (Saskatoon, SK)• Daniel Santoro, Lawyer, Doucette Boni Santoro LLP (Toronto, ON)

The following individuals serve on the Justice Centre’s Advisory Council:• Dr. Barry Cooper, Department of Political Science, University of Calgary• Troy Lanigan, President, Canadian Taxpayers Federation (Victoria, BC)• Tom Ross, McLennan Ross LLP (Calgary, AB)• Brian Purdy, Defense counsel and retired Crown Prosecutor (Calgary, AB)• Dr. Clive Seligman, University of Western Ontario Department of Psychology (London, ON)• Michael Taube, journalist and public policy commentator (Toronto, ON)

16

Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms2015 Annual Report