Latest news with #Larochelle
Hamilton Spectator
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Hamilton Spectator
Whitehorse civility policy updates floated after legal action
The city is planning on changing its civility policy — and it could result in a lawsuit against it being dropped. The policy, introduced last summer by the previous council, has been a controversial one: it attracted multiple delegates when it was first proposed. It passed with four votes in favour and two against. Then, after threatening legal action, the Canadian Constitution Foundation, a charity group, filed a court challenge against the policy on the grounds it violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The original policy set rules regarding the conduct of people entering city hall chambers while council meets. Among other things, the policy banned micro-aggressions, signs, physical attacks, threatening behaviour, and verbal abuse, including threats. The original policy also bans participants from wearing clothing that has imagery or language which is discriminatory, offensive, detrimental, profane, racial, sexist, violent or vulgar. At the May 20 standing committee of city council, corporate services director Valerie Braga introduced a new version of the civility policy with changes at least partially motivated by the legal challenge initiated late last year. The policy overhaul completely axes the section about micro-aggressions and allows certain signs based on sign size and content. It includes a definition of hate speech and changes the parameters of what type of clothing is permitted inside city council chambers. The petition filed with the Yukon Supreme Court by the Canadian Constitution Foundation in November alleged the civility policy is contrary to section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which guarantees freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression. It also includes freedom of the press and other media of communication. The lawyer representing the Canadian Constitution Foundation in this lawsuit, Vincent Larochelle, told the News that his client would be backing down from the lawsuit should the updates to the policy be adopted. 'They consider the amendments to address the vast majority, the essence of what their lawsuit was,' Larochelle said. 'My client's issue was with how vague and wide-ranging and subjective that previous policy was. It covered all sorts of language or expression, from attire, signs, language and even just offensive stuff, but the fact that you're offended by what someone is saying doesn't make it necessarily hate speech.' He said his client said the original policy was 'flagrantly unconstitutional.' One of the things highlighted in the petition, as noted by Larochelle, was that the policy was brought forth in the wake of people voicing support for the people of Gaza within city chambers. The Middle Eastern enclave has been under Israeli bombardment since the Hamas-led Oct. 7 massacre in 2023. A United Nations report tallying cumulative deaths as of May 14, 2025, said 1,200 people were killed in that massacre. The same United Nations report said nearly 53,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 2023. Last summer, delegates in Whitehorse packed the public gallery to speak on a motion to publicly support calls for a ceasefire. At May 20's standing committee meeting, Braga told councillors about the history of the policy when presenting the changes. 'When the policy was originally brought forward, we had gone through a period of time where we had a few contentious meetings. Topics were heated. People took positions on one side or the other. There was a gap in extremes, for lack of a better term,' she said. 'And what we wanted to do was to ensure that all participants felt safe coming into chambers, felt able to speak their piece, that council also felt that they were respected through the process, and were able to give respect back to participants. It was very important to the council of the day that people feel safe within this room. That was the main intent of the policy.' The new policy focuses on hate speech, Larochelle said, and there are recognized limits to that form of expression. The Canadian Constitution Foundation does not take issue with that type of targeted policy. 'We need to be able to have rigorous debates in our society, and the civility policy as amended, if it's accepted, would presumably allow that to happen in the context of city council meetings,' said Larochelle. 'What the lawsuit was getting at was that vagueness, the micro-aggression, the sign ban, the attire ban, and all that's essentially gone.' The majority of the current council was elected in October, after the civility policy was installed by the previous council. Only Coun. Dan Boyd and Mayor Kirk Cameron are holdovers from the previous council: they both voted in favour of adopting the policy when it was presented last year. Coun. Lenore Morris, who is also a lawyer, said it is incumbent on city council to not infringe on political speech anymore than necessary. 'I think everybody who's on city council really wants to encourage engagement and polite, courteous, lively discourse with the public, and I think that the changes that we are making to the policy, or that we are proposing to make to the policy, will permit that,' she said. Coun. Jenny Hamilton also said that she was upset as a citizen when the policy was installed last year, and that she supports the changes. Larochelle said his client still has some minor concerns regarding the policy — specifically on some remaining vagueness within the policy and the limits on signs — but they do not believe the updated policy would warrant a lawsuit. He said the Canadian Constitution Foundation considers the amendments a victory. 'The lawsuit seems to have triggered a pretty significant overhaul of the policy. So even better, if we can affect change without having to go to court.'
CBC
10-04-2025
- Politics
- CBC
Yukon lawyer says N.W.T.'s proposed eviction legislation targeting drug dealers could be unconstitutional
The N.W.T. Department of Justice is planning public engagement on Safer Communities and Neighbourhoods (SCAN) legislation this fall, but a Yukon lawyer is warning that such a law could be unconstitutional. The SCAN Act would allow the government to bypass the Residential Tenancies Act and the criminal justice system to shut down buildings with criminal activity and kick out drug dealers. It's part of a suite of proposals that the N.W.T.'s premier has said will make buildings and people living in them safer. A SCAN Act was voted down in the territory more than a decade ago, and has proven controversial elsewhere such as in the Yukon – where a judge struck down parts of the act in September, ruling that allowing governments to evict tenants with five days' notice infringes on the Charter rights to security of the person. Vincent Larochelle, who represented a woman accused of drug trafficking in that case, said the legislation risks "inviting everyone to become … a vigilante without any checks or balances" and could amplify racial biases. In 2020, government officials served Larochelle's client, Celia Wright, with a five-day eviction notice following complaints of alleged drug activity in her rental unit in a Whitehorse suburb. The eviction applied to everyone living at the property, including her eight children and, according to Larochelle, made Wright's elderly mother-in-law homeless. "If you're going to affect someone's rights based on criminal behaviour, the proper process to do that is the criminal justice system," said Larochelle. A spate of drug-related crime, alleged murders and fatal overdoses in the N.W.T. are reviving calls from MLAs and the premier to establish SCAN legislation. This October, the N.W.T. Department of Justice will seek public feedback on the act, as well as a proposed Civil Forfeiture Act allowing police to seize proceeds of crime and a Trespass Act to remove people causing disturbances. Legislation could be introduced by summer 2026, a department spokesperson said in a Tuesday email. A cabinet spokesperson said Jay Macdonald, the recently appointed justice minister and the N.W.T. Premier were unavailable for an interview for this story. Speaking in the Legislative Assembly on Feb. 6, Simpson said the goal of the proposed legislation is to "make [the N.W.T.] a miserable place for drug dealers to do business." SCAN legislation emerged from Manitoba in the 2000s because businesses were being affected by street crime. Such laws are now in force in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Saskatchewan, Yukon and Alberta. Civil liberties association monitoring for changes Larochelle said in practice, a SCAN Act creates housing instability which can increase criminal activity. Short-notice evictions cause "extraordinary psychological suffering" and displace vulnerable people onto the streets or into the homes of family and friends, he said. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA) intervened in Wright v. Yukon because SCAN represents a "gross deprivation of liberty interest", said CCLA equality program director, Harini Sivalingam. "People that had nothing to do with the activities that were being targeted — family members, children, grandparents, roommates — all of those individuals were getting swept up in this as well," said Sivalingam. The CCLA will monitor legislative changes in the N.W.T., she said. He said the targets of SCAN legislation are often already ensnared with the criminal justice system, child and family services or grappling with addictions. They are very vulnerable, have a lot of internalized guilt, and don't usually hire legal counsel to fight the eviction notice, he said. Celia Wright, however, launched a Charter challenge. "She knew what it meant to her brothers and sisters, Indigenous people in the Yukon and she would have none of it," he said. Human rights commission will provide feedback In 2007, N.W.T. MLAs voted down a similar bill. RCMP were "keenly interested" in the legislation at the time according to an Aug. 21, 2007 letter. The N.W.T. Human Rights Commission back then urged MLAs to scrap it. Its current chair, Charles Dent, said in a recent interview the commission will supply comments on any future legislation, such as how a person's social condition, like being low-income, is a protected ground. If someone lives in a building that is the only one they can afford, and the criminal actions of others trigger an eviction, this contravenes the N.W.T. Human Rights Act, he said. "Discrimination that can be tied to any of the protected grounds or areas will have to be carefully examined before determining whether or not SCAN legislation is going to be workable in the N.W.T.," he said.
