Page 7

By: Drew Yewchuk

Decision Commented On: Western Canada Wilderness Committee v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2024 FC 870 (CanLII)

PDF Version: Canadian Species at Risk, Where the Government Ignores Emergencies and Law

Western Canada Wilderness Committee v Canada (Environment and Climate Change), 2024 FC 870 (CanLII) is a Federal Court decision about the obligations of the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change (the Minister) to recommend emergency protections for species facing imminent threats to their survival or recovery under the Species at Risk Act, SC 2002, c 29 (SARA). Justice Yvan Roy concluded that the Minister had unlawfully delayed recommending that the Governor in Council issue an emergency order under SARA for the spotted owl, and rejected the Minister’s interpretation that recommending an emergency order could be delayed while the Minister gathered extensive information. The decision also addresses a long-term problem with the implementation of SARA: internal executive branch processes have not complied with the text, purpose, or past judicial interpretations of SARA.

Encampments on Campus Part 2

By Jennifer Koshan

On June 28, 2024

In Protest

By: Jennifer Koshan and Jonnette Watson Hamilton

Document Commented On: University of Calgary, Temporary structures and overnight protests, 2024-UC-003-A

PDF Version: Encampments on Campus Part 2

Last week we posted commentary about the University of Calgary’s May 9, 2024 response to an on-campus encampment (see “Encampments on Campus: Trespass, Universities, and the Charter”). An ABlawg reader subsequently sent us a copy of a University document entitled “Temporary structures and overnight protests” (Direction), which was apparently handed out to protestors on May 9. The document does not seem to be available on the University’s Policies and Procedures webpage, which is why we are calling it a direction rather than a policy. And while the document does not have “direction” in its title, it internally references itself as a “direction”, as we describe below.

The New Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Approach to Time Extensions for FOIP Requests

By Drew Yewchuk

On June 25, 2024

In Access to Information, Administrative Law

By: Drew Yewchuk

Administrative Policy Commented on: OIPC Practice Note Request for Time Extension Under FOIP Section 14

PDF Version: The New Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner Approach to Time Extensions for FOIP Requests

On June 17^th, 2024, the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta (OIPC) changed their policy for Time Extension Requests Under Section 14 of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, RSA 2000, c F-25 (FOIP). The OIPC issued two new standardized forms and issued a practice note for public bodies seeking time extensions (the Practice Note). The OIPC’s attention to how they exercise their discretion in granting time extensions is encouraging and shows the OIPC is doing what it can to address the delay problem in Alberta FOIP. This post assesses a few of the more notable changes.

Encampments on Campus: Trespass, Universities, and the Charter

By Jennifer Koshan

On June 21, 2024

In Constitutional, Protest

By: Jennifer Koshan and Jonnette Watson Hamilton

Matter Commented On: University of Calgary and Calgary Police Service Response to an On Campus Encampment on May 9, 2024

PDF Version: Encampments on Campus: Trespass, Universities, and the Charter

Campus encampments have proliferated this spring, demanding that universities divest from funds supporting Israel’s military operations in Gaza. In Alberta, the University of Calgary called in the police to dismantle a student encampment in the University quad on May 9, 2024 less than 24 hours after it went up, and similar action followed at the University of Alberta two days later. Concerns were raised about the use of force by the universities and police (see e.g., a letter from law professors here and from a former justice of the Alberta Court of Appeal here). The universities defended their actions on the basis that they had properly invoked their powers under trespass law and university policies. According to a message to the campus community from University of Calgary President Ed McCauley on May 10, 2024:

The Online Harms Bill – Part 2 – Private Messaging

By Sanjampreet Singh

On June 14, 2024

In Internet Law, Privacy

By: Sanjampreet Singh and Emily Laidlaw

Matter Commented On: Online Harms Bill C-63

PDF Version: The Online Harms Bill – Part 2 – Private Messaging

This is the second in a series of posts about the Online Harms Bill C-63, proposed federal legislation the stated aims of which are to reduce harmful content online, hold social media platforms accountable, promote safety and child protection, empower users and victims, and increase transparency.

This post examines the social media services that would be regulated by the proposed Online Harms Act (Act) and potentially investigated by the Digital Safety Commission. More specifically, this post focuses on what is excluded from this Bill – private messaging – a “wicked problem” in online harms where one is damned if you do or damned if you don’t include it. We propose a middle path.