Adam: Protests are supposed to make us uncomfortable. We don't need more rules restricting them

Ottawa Citizen

a day ago

As city staff proceed with plans to draft an anti-protest bylaw — euphemistically called a 'vulnerable infrastructure bylaw' — then report back to council, it is important to examine how, lately, the City of Ottawa has been finding different ways to row back bedrock democratic principles of public engagement, free speech and the right to protest that are guaranteed to all citizens.
Article content
Article content
The gradual, but steady erosion of basic rights under the guise of security or good governance should trouble all residents.
Article content
Article content
Remember the Ottawa Police Services Board, which includes three city councillors? In violation of citizens' right to free speech, the board has given itself the power to censure what residents say. Those who wish to speak before the board, must first submit their remarks in writing ahead of time — all in the name of good governance, we are told. The policy is designed to silence critics and if the board doesn't like what's on your mind, you won't be heard.
Article content
Then you have the new security measures that turn city hall, the seat of local government, into something of a prohibited zone where visitors have to go through airport-like security checks, including metal detectors.
Article content
Ban protests while upholding them?
Article content
But the biggest anti-democratic hurdle council wants to impose on the city is the 'vulnerable social infrastructure bylaw,' or if you like, the bubble bylaw. The idea is to ban protests within 80 metres of 'social infrastructure' such as schools, places of worship, hospitals and long-term care facilities, because some people find them rather uncomfortable. City staff have nine months to craft this seemingly oxymoronic bylaw that, in the same breath, bans protests and upholds the right to protest.
Article content
Article content
What is lost on our city council is that protests are indeed supposed to make people uncomfortable. If a society is comfortable in what it does, what policies governments adopt, what values underpin laws no matter how bad, nothing changes. Injustice, discrimination and marginalization become entrenched because the majority does not feel the agony of those on the margins. But when society is forced to look at itself, engage in self-reflection and be forced out of its comfort zone, that's when change occurs.
Article content
Article content
The fight for civil rights everywhere was uncomfortable for many, who saw it as an affront. So was the fight for self-determination by countries around the world. Think of gay rights, Indigenous rights, and many others which could never have been won without unrelenting, uncomfortable and sometimes contentious protest. When labour unions go on protest, sometimes blocking streets or forcing road closures and delaying traffic, it is destructive to people's lives, but we live with it because we see the higher purpose. When people are denied their rights, whatever they may be, their only option is the fundamental right to protest. And it doesn't matter if others find it uncomfortable.