07) COURT STRIKES DOWN B.C. GAG LAW

     The BC Court of Appeal has again unanimously rejected the BC Liberal government's latest attempt at gagging third parties from advertising about political issues. This time, the government has announced it will finally give up.

     Prior to the 2009 B.C. election, the Campbell Liberals tried to impose restrictions on advertising for 60 days before the campaign period. The government's stated intention was to prevent trade unions or other movements from mounting effective publicity campaigns to raise their issues with the public.

     But that heavy-handed legislation went much further, threatening heavy fines against nearly any organization or individual which spent any money to speak out on issues. According to legal advice at the time, for example, a newspaper such as People's Voice would have been barred from printing articles or advertisements which covered topics likely to arise during an election, starting sixty days prior to the writ being dropped.

     After the courts struck down that law as an infringement of free speech rights, the Liberals pushed another set of amendments through the Legislature, proposing restrictions for up to 40 days before the campaign period. The court ruled that these amendments violate the Charter of Rights as well.

     Writing on behalf of the court, Mr. Justice Lowry quoted from Supreme Court of Canada decisions saying "It is difficult to imagine a guaranteed right more important to a democratic society than freedom of expression. Indeed a democracy cannot exist without that freedom to express new ideas and to put forward opinions about the functioning of public institutions."

     He added that advertising by individuals and groups "enriches the political discourse" by raising issues unlikely to get the attention of parties and candidates. The court said that interfering with political expression is allowed "only where there are the clearest and most compelling reasons for doing so," and found that the government had failed to show any such reason.

     Indirectly, the ruling may bolster efforts by small political parties to cut down the web of political and bureaucratic barriers which hamper their efforts to reach voters. In recent elections, there have been growing attempts to block small parties from taking part in all-candidate forums, and even to bar candidates from speaking to voters or handing out campaign materials on post-secondary campuses. Such measures are clearly at odds with the emphasis on free political expression outlined by Justice Lowry in the B.C. case.