Schutten says there’s a chance the government will appeal the ruling. “When I read (the ruling), I can’t see anything that I would want to appeal if I were the other side.” Schutten says it’s important to remember that when a judgement is appealed, facts and findings of fact are not allowed to be part of the appeal. As such, he says, the judge did an “excellent job” of summarizing what the law is and applying that to the facts of the case.
ARPA launched the lawsuit together with pro-life blogger Patricia Maloney, who argued that the ban on abortion information violated her Charter right to freedom of the press.
The ruling also has big implications in British Columbia, which has an almost identical ban on abortion information on the books.
So, the case is finished. The trial has wrapped up. The judge has heard our oral arguments and will now reserve judgement, contemplate what was written, and what was said and give us his decision in the next little while. We will keep you, our dear supporters, updated. The government of Ontario made compelling arguments this afternoon about the need for the judge to be deferential to the choices of the law makers. This required careful reply. The outcome of this case is not certain – it could go either way. Your continued prayers for a favourable decision are coveted.
Please visit the below links for more information on this case:
Ontario Government Forced to Answer to Court for Censoring Abortion Stats
Press Release: Blocking Ontario Abortion Stats Blocks Proper Health Policy Research
For immediate release from the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada
February 1, 2017
BLOCKING ONTARIO ABORTION STATS BLOCKS PROPER HEALTH POLICY RESEARCH
OTTAWA – The Ontario government is forced to answer for their censorship of abortion statistics today. The Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada, together with blogger Patricia Maloney, will argue in the Ontario Superior Court today that the censorship of abortion statistics is an infringement of freedom of expression, including freedom of the press, and that the censorship is unreasonable and unjustified.
Ontario is the only province that has this kind of statistical censorship. Even Quebec, the most socially liberal province in Canada, doesn’t shield its citizens from knowing the facts about abortion. ARPA Canada’s Director of Law and Policy André Schutten notes, “Clearly, open reporting of abortion statistics can co-exist with taxpayer-funded abortion on demand. How can Ontario justify dropping the cone of silence on anonymous statistics regarding a procedure legally performed on the public dime?”
Schutten explained the rational for the constitutional challenge. “Our organization is devoted to promoting grassroots political action. We strive to give citizens the tools they need to become politically engaged so they can be a voice for truth, justice, freedom, and human rights. But to do that properly, we need accurate information.”
Ontario’s censorship affects, among other things, proper health policy research. For example, an April 2016 Canadian Press story noted a troubling trend of skewed boy-girl birth ratios. Marcelo Urquia, who conducted a study on the skewed birth ratios for the Canadian Medical Association Journal, is quoted as saying, “The CMAJ paper suggests that a large part of these missing girls are probably due to induced abortions, but we don’t know really exactly what is the number.” Why is Ontario’s government hiding stats that could help health researchers?
Even Ontario’s Health Minister Eric Hoskins is reportedly disturbed by the findings. But without access to the data in government hands, the press, non-governmental organizations and others cannot meaningfully contribute to this important conversation.
In 2010, the Ontario Legislature passed the Broader Public Accountability Act which, ironically, included a clause to amend the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) to prohibit all access to abortion related information. That provision came into effect in January, 2012. ARPA Canada and Maloney filed suit against the Ontario government in April 2015, and finally get their day in court today.
ARPA Canada’s in-house lawyer John Sikkema, who will argue the case together with lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos, said, “Freedom of information is protected by the Charter’s freedom of expression guarantee because without access to government information, a citizen cannot meaningfully discuss, debate, scrutinize or make informed opinions on matters of public policy.”
Schutten concludes, “This case is about transparency and democracy. In our view, the actions of a democratic government and the money it spends should be open to scrutiny by the taxpayer, the media, and the voter. On this point, people from all sides of the political spectrum should join forces with us.”
What: Constitutional challenge (freedom of expression and the press) re: censorship of abortion statistics
Date: Wednesday, February 1, 2017
Time: Court hearing: 10:00-16:30, ARPA staff will be available for comment immediately following the hearing
Location: Ontario Superior Court, 161 Elgin Street, Ottawa
Factum: ARPA Canada’s written legal arguments as filed with the court can be read here
– 30 –
For further comment, contact Hannah Sikkema, media facilitator at 1-866-691-2772, ext. 1 or [email protected].
On Wednesday, February 1st, the Ontario government will be forced to answer for their censorship of abortion statistics in court. ARPA Canada, together with pro-life blogger Patricia Maloney, will argue that the censorship of abortion statistics is an infringement of freedom of expression, including freedom of the press, and that the censorship is unreasonable and unjustified.
ARPA Canada is devoted to promoting grassroots political action. We strive to give citizens, particularly Christian citizens, the tools they need to become politically engaged so they can be a voice for truth, justice, freedom, and human rights. But in order to do that properly, we need accurate information.
Freedom of information is protected by the Charter’s freedom of expression guarantee because without access to government information, a citizen cannot meaningfully discuss, debate, scrutinize or make informed opinions on matters of public policy.
This case is about transparency and democracy. In our view, the actions of a democratic government and the money it spends should be open to scrutiny by the taxpayer and voter. On this point, people from all sides of the political spectrum should join forces with us.
Provincial governments have a responsibility to ensure that there is access to the information needed to make good decisions about health policy. No matter what your thoughts are on pre-born human rights, this form of censorship is contrary to everything a just, open and democratic society should stand for. Our citizens deserve better.
ARPA Canada and Maloney filed suit against the Ontario government in April 2015, and they finally get their day in court tomorrow. The factum (written arguments) can be read here. ARPA Canada is particularly thankful for the hard work of staff lawyer John Sikkema (pictured hard at work preparing for the oral arguments) as well as lawyer Albertos Polizogopoulos for their labours on this file.
Update: Check out pictures of the 150+ volunteers and 100,000 pink and blue flags at Queens Park here.
Today a press conference was held at Queen’s Park, Toronto, where ARPA Canada announced that it is proceeding with legal action against the Ontario government, declaring that section 65(5.7) of the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) violates section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
More Information: You can read the remarks of the three participants of the press conference, Niki Pennings, spokesperson for WeNeedaLaw.ca, Patricia Maloney, blogger at Run With Life and André Schutten, legal counsel for ARPA Canada by clicking here. The notice of application to the Superior Court of Justice is available here.
Oped: New article from ARPA’s legal counsel and WeNeedaLAW’s director here.
Interview Requests: For further comment or interviews with either Mike Schouten or André Schutten please contact Niki Pennings at 519-709-4478 or [email protected]
For Planning Purposes
April 22, 2015
ARPA CANADA TO MAKE ANNOUNCEMENT ABOUT LEGAL ACTION
In an afternoon press conference in the Queen’s Park Press Gallery, the Association for Reformed Political Action (ARPA) Canada will provide details on a constitutional challenge they filed earlier in the day. Niki Pennings, spokesperson for WeNeedaLAW.ca, will also be speaking about why WeNeedaLAW.ca has placed 100,000 pink and blue flags on the lawn in Queen’s Park.
“The 100,000 flags represent the approximately 100,000+ human lives that are ended by abortion every year in Canada,” said Ms. Pennings. “The courts have consistently spoken to the responsibility of government to enact laws that protect pre-born human rights and the Ontario government is not exempt from this responsibility.”
Over one hundred and fifty volunteers helped place the 100,000 pink and blue flags at Queen’s Park. The flags cover the entire south-east lawn.
As for the constitutional challenge, André Schutten, lawyer for ARPA Canada would only say that, “The court action we are initiating is about justice. Justice requires accountability. Each victim of abortion is a human being. Not only does every victim need to be accounted for, but public policy itself should be open to evaluation and scrutiny by the taxpayer and voter.”
The flag display will be set up until 4:00pm.
What: ARPA Canada Press Conference
When: Wednesday, April 22, 2015
Where: Queen’s Park Press Gallery
Time: 2:00 PM
– 30 –
Interview Requests: Contact Niki Pennings, [email protected] or 519-709-4478
In January, 2012, the Ontario government quietly slipped in an amendment to the provincial Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act (FIPPA) whereby all information related to abortion is no longer accessible via an Access To Information and Privacy (ATIP) request. Section 65(5.7) reads: “This Act does not apply to records relating to the provision of abortion services.” Note that one of the FIPPA’s purposes is to guarantee access to government information to maintain transparency and accountability. Yet this addition undermines this purpose and was never debated in the Legislature.
Patricia Maloney, a pro-life blogger who we have regular contact with and who has done excellent work using ATIPs, ran up against this roadblock in January 2014. When her request for statistical information was denied (under the new provision) she appealed the decision on her own, but lost. She then retained a lawyer on a pro bono basis and appealed again. After a third appeal, she finally received the information late last year. The government released this information to her “outside of the FIPPA process” mere days before her hearing in court. But the bad law remains on the books.
ARPA Canada and Patricia Maloney are now challenging the law itself as unconstitutional. We have filed a notice of application asking the Ontario Superior Court to strike down section 65(5.7) of Ontario’s FIPPA. Freedom of Information is guaranteed under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, falling under the freedom of expression protection. A successful Charter challenge would produce the information we are looking for, would require the Ontario legislature to amend the legislation, and would expose the extremism of the Ontario government in banning all information, including basic statistical information, from the citizens of Ontario in order to hide the injustice of abortion.
On the April 27th edition of Lighthouse News, we featured an interview with Patricia Maloney and André Schutten about the history of this file, and some of the particulars of the case. You can hear that interview here.
See the PDFs and links below for more details:
Notice of Application – ARPA FIPPA
FAQs on FIPPA
http://www.weneedalaw.ca/blog/521-censorship-of-government-policy-and-spending-needs-to-stop
http://run-with-life.blogspot.ca/2016/01/charter-challenge-for-hiding-abortion.html