Manitoba introduces bill proposing tougher fines for protesters

FILE: Members of the Urban Warrior Alliance set up a blockade along a CN and Via rail line west of Winnipeg.

WINNIPEG — The Manitoba government has introduced a bill that proposes tougher fines and possible imprisonment for people interfering with critical infrastructure.

Justice Minister Cameron Friesen said the Progressive Conservative government was looking for a balance between the rights of people to protest and the needs to maintain infrastructure.

“The intent there would be to allow for people to gather, allow for their voices to be heard but to keep them and everyone safe while ensuring the unfettered operation, construction or use of that infrastructure,” Friesen said Monday.

The bill allows for the owner or operator of the infrastructure to be able to apply for a court order to create a temporary protection zone.

Included would be oil or natural gas pipelines and provincial highways. It also includes courthouses, hospitals and animal processing facilities.

If a person were to go into the area, he or she could be fined $5,000 or jailed for up to 30 days. A corporation could be fined up to $25,000.

Each day a person doesn’t follow the court order, the fine can be imposed again.

A court would be able to designate an area where people could protest.

“There would be no desire to see the voices of Manitobans diminished in any way,” Friesen said.

A controversial bill targeting protestors became law in Alberta last year following cross-Canada demonstrations in support of Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs in B.C. who were opposed to pipeline construction in their territory.

That legislation forbids anyone from willfully damaging or interfering with essential infrastructure and also brings in fines and jail time.

It is facing a constitutional challenge from an Alberta labour union.

Friesen said Manitoba’s proposed legislation is different. The minister said the Tory bill doesn’t just target those protesting the oil industry and is clearer about what constitutes critical infrastructure.

Nahanni Fontaine, justice critic for Manitoba’s Opposition New Democrats, said the large fines can be devastating for people who are standing up for their rights. She accused the Tories of using the bill to silence anyone who doesn’t agree with them.

“It’s important for Manitobans and Canadians to have that opportunity to express their displeasure at whatever the issue may be,” she said.

By: The Canadian Press, published March 15, 2021.

[SOURCE]

$16.5M settlement in lawsuit over mass arrests at 2010 G20 summit

G20 summit protesters clash with riot police in downtown Toronto on Saturday, June 26, 2010.

$16.5M Toronto G20 settlement

A decade-long legal battle over mass arrests at the 2010 G20 summit in Toronto has come to a close after police and hundreds of protesters and others reached a $16.5 million settlement.

Lawyers representing those behind the class-action lawsuit said Monday the agreement comes after 10 years of court proceedings and negotiations with the Toronto Police Services Board.

Under the settlement, those arrested will each be entitled to compensation between $5,000 and $24,700, depending on their experiences, the lawyers said in a statement.

The deal also includes a public acknowledgment by police regarding the mass arrests and the conditions in which protestors where detained, as well as a commitment to changing how protests are policed in the future.

Those who were wrongfully arrested will also have their police records expunged, the lawyers said. The class action represented some 1,100 people who were arrested during the event.

Sherry Good, who launched the lawsuit in 2010, said the agreement “does bring about some justice,” and she hopes the right to free expression will be better respected from now on.

“The terrifying way in which I and 400 others were suddenly and arbitrarily surrounded and held by riot police on a street corner for four hours in a freezing downpour changed forever the way I look at police, continues to give me chills,” she said in a statement.

Thomas Taylor, who joined the lawsuit as another representative plaintiff, said the incident showed him “how very fragile civil liberties are for so many of us.”

“For me and hundreds of others, being suddenly surrounded and held captive by frightening numbers of riot police when we had done nothing at all, going through violent and unlawful arrests, and then being thrown into a nightmare detention centre, was a stunning and horrifying experience,” he said in a statement.

Toronto police said the force is “pleased to reach resolution” but did not otherwise comment on the agreement.

Canada’s most populous city hosted the G20 summit of world leaders in June 2010.

Many public demonstrations were organized to address issues like climate change, globalization, and poverty. Thousands of protestors demonstrated peacefully, but some protests were accompanied by deliberate vandalism.

Police reacted by encircling large groups of hundreds of protestors in several locations in downtown Toronto with cordons of riot police, holding them for hours, and then transferring many of them to a temporary detention centre in the largest mass arrest in Canadian history.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs said Toronto Police Services objected to the class-action proceedings in court, and the suit wasn’t certified as such until a police appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was dismissed in November 2016.

The agreement must still be reviewed and approved by a judge, with a hearing scheduled for Oct. 19.

The Canadian Press – Aug 17, 2020

[SOURCE]

Controversial bill targeting rail blockade protesters soon to be Alberta law

Around 20 demonstrators set up a blockade on a CN Rail line west of Edmonton. (Craig Ryan/CBC)

Violators could face fines up to $25,000 and six months in jail

To some, it’s a bill that will enforce the rule of law, protect public safety and stop protesters from harming the economy.

To others, the Alberta government’s Bill 1 is an affront to democratic rights, an authoritarian overreach and a threat to Indigenous Peoples’ way of life.

The controversial Critical Infrastructure Defence Act, Premier Jason Kenney’s signature legislation to start the current session, passed third reading in the legislature on Thursday.

Government house leader Jason Nixon hopes it will receive the lieutenant-governor’s royal assent Friday, immediately making it law.

Introduced in February, the bill allows hefty penalties against any person or company found to have blocked, damaged or entered without reason any “essential infrastructure.”

The list of possible sites is lengthy and includes pipelines, rail lines, highways, oil sites, telecommunications equipment, radio towers, electrical lines, dams, farms and more, on public or private land.

Violators can be fined up to $25,000, sentenced to six months in jail, or both. Corporations that break the law can be fined up to $200,000. Each day they block or damage a site is considered a new offence.

Kenney introduced the legislation against the backdrop of protests across Canada, in which groups blockaded rail lines, commuter train routes and roadways in solidarity with Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs opposed to the construction of the Coastal Gas Link pipeline through their territory in northern B.C.

“When we brought this in, it was at a time of turmoil in Canada,” Justice Minister Doug Schweitzer said in the legislature Thursday. “We had lawlessness across this country, where critical infrastructure was being obstructed. That is simply unacceptable. Here in the province of Alberta we expect the rule of law to be upheld.”

A CN Rail line in west Edmonton was the site of one such blockade in February.

The blockades snarled the movement of goods and passengers across the country, prompting layoffs and concerns about the food supply.

MLAs call protesters ‘spoiled kids’

After a nearly three-month delay caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the bill returned to the legislature this week for debate.

United Conservative Party MLAs called the protesters “ecoterrorists” and “spoiled kids,” saying some participants joined blockades because they thought it was a cool thing to do with their friends and post about on social media.

Those characterizations make Alison McIntosh cringe. The Climate Justice Edmonton organizer said freezing on a winter’s day while being harassed by counter-protesters isn’t “fun.”

She said the politicians’ comments are demeaning and dismissive of protesters’ legitimate concerns about the environment and economic diversification.

“It shows a lot of disregard for people who are their constituents — the people they purport to be looking out for,” said McIntosh, 28. “And it really highlights that we’re not the ones they’re considering when they pass legislation like Bill 1.”

Although it’s hard to tell until pandemic public health restrictions ease, Bill 1 could substantially change grassroots protests in Alberta, McIntosh said.

The organization can’t afford to pay such penalties if protesters are convicted, she said.

“It’s really troubling, but we’re creative. We know that there’s ways we can get our message across,” she said.

David Khan, leader of the Alberta Liberal party and a constitutional and Indigenous rights lawyer, said Thursday the new law could interfere with Indigenous Peoples’ rights to hunt, fish or gather on traditional land.

He calls the law draconian, legally dubious and a piece of political theatre designed to trivialize the tensions between oil and gas development, Indigenous rights and the environment.

In addition to potentially running afoul of citizens’ rights to free expression and association, Khan thinks the law could jeopardize Alberta’s international reputation as an ethical and democratic source of oil.

When asked for comment on Thursday, the Assembly of First Nations pointed to a statement issued in February by Alberta Regional Chief Marlene Poitras urging the premier to withdraw the bill.

“Allowing the bill to pass will serve to erode individual rights, unfairly target Indigenous Peoples, and has no place in a democratic society,” she said at the time.

Gil McGowan, president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, said the broadness of the law could allow the government to potentially shut down political demonstrations at the legislature or interfere with a strike picket line.

He said the federation will launch a constitutional challenge.

“The UCP is trying to frame Bill 1 as a patriotic defence of our oil and gas industry,” he said Thursday. “But if you’re patriotic, this is actually the last piece of legislation you should be supporting because it is fundamentally undemocratic.”

NDP justice critic Kathleen Ganley attempted to introduce amendments to Bill 1 this week, which were voted down by the United Conservative Party.

Government says it supports legal protest

The Opposition NDP also raised concerns the bill is too far reaching.

The party’s legal analysis found the language is so broad, it could be interpreted to mean that just being on public land or walking down a highway or next to a rail line could be illegal, justice critic Kathleen Ganley said in the legislature Thursday.

Such strict application of the law could be especially problematic given the large fines allowed, she said.

Central Peace-Notley UCP MLA Todd Loewen said in the legislature her concerns were “ridiculous.”

The high fines are designed to help perpetrators understand the drastic economic consequences of interfering with industries, he said.

Nixon said stopping protests or demonstrations is not their goal.

“You have a right to protest and express yourself in democracy and this government will always fight to make sure that happens,” he said.

“You do not have a right while you’re protesting to stopping trains from moving and products from getting to market, causing companies to go bankrupt, or to have to suspend or fire or layoff employees because your products can’t get to market.”

[SOURCE]

Spy Agency says federal Trans Mountain pipeline purchase seen as ‘Betrayal’ by many opponents

An Indigenous man raises his drum above his head as he and others are silhouetted while singing during a protest against the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion in Vancouver on Tuesday May 29, 2018. (CANADIAN PRESS)

Canada’s spy agency says many members of the environmental and Indigenous communities see the federal purchase of the Trans Mountain pipeline as a betrayal, and suggests that could intensify opposition to expanding the project.

A Canadian Security Intelligence Service assessment highlights a renewed sense of indignation among protesters and clearly indicates the spy service’s ongoing interest in anti-petroleum activism.

The Canadian Press used the Access to Information Act to obtain a heavily censored copy of the June CSIS brief, originally classified top secret.

Civil liberties and environmental activists questioned the rationale for CSIS’s interest, given that opposition to the pipeline project has been peaceful.

CSIS spokeswoman Tahera Mufti stressed the spy service is committed to following the governing legislation that forbids it to probe lawful protest and dissent.

“While we cannot publicly disclose our investigative interests, we can say that it is important for the service to pose important analytical questions on these types of issues, such as the question of whether developments such as the purchase of a pipeline could give rise to a national-security threat to Canada’s critical infrastructure.”

Earlier this year, Kinder Morgan dropped plans to twin an existing pipeline that carries about 300,000 barrels of bitumen daily from Alberta to British Columbia. The federal government announced in late May it would buy the pipeline and related components for $4.5 billion.

The government intends to finance and manage construction of the second pipeline — which would increase the overall flow of bitumen to 890,000 barrels a day — and ultimately try to find a buyer.

The CSIS brief characterizes resistance to the pipeline project as a “developing intelligence issue.”

“Indigenous and non-Indigenous opponents of the project continue to highlight the increasing threats to the planet as a result of climate change and the incompatibility of new pipeline and oil sands projects with Canada’s 2015 commitment under the Paris Climate Accord,” the brief says. “At the same time, many within the broader Indigenous community view the federal government’s purchase and possible financing, construction and operation of an expanded bitumen pipeline as wholly incompatible with its attempts at Crown-Indigenous reconciliation.”

The pipeline acquisition and commitment to complete the project is therefore “viewed as a betrayal” by many within both the environmental and Indigenous communities, CSIS says.

“Indigenous opposition at the grassroots level remains strong. In response to the federal purchase, numerous Indigenous and environmental organizations have restated their commitment to prevent construction.”

The brief singles out the Treaty Alliance Against Tar Sands Expansion, noting it has signatories from over 50 North American First Nations in its bid to halt the project. It also features a May quote from Canadian environmental organization Stand.earth that the decision “will haunt the Trudeau government.”

The intelligence brief was completed a little more than two months before the Federal Court of Appeal quashed government approval of the pipeline project due to inadequate consultation with Indigenous groups and failure to properly assess the effect of increased tanker traffic in the waters off British Columbia.

In the wake of the court ruling, the federal government ordered the National Energy Board to reassess the tanker issue and asked a former Supreme Court justice to oversee fresh consultations with Indigenous communities.

The CSIS brief notes there had been “no acts of serious violence” stemming from peaceful demonstrations and blockades at Trans Mountain facilities in British Columbia that resulted in the arrest of more than 200 people, or at smaller protests across the country.

However, the document includes a section titled “Violent Confrontations and Resource Development” that mentions past conflicts over shale-gas development in New Brunswick and a high-profile pipeline in North Dakota.

It is unclear, because of the redactions to the document, exactly what CSIS was looking at, said Josh Paterson, executive director of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association, which has expressed strong concern about the spy service’s monitoring of activists.

In the information that has been released, there is no suggestion of a threat to national security or critical infrastructure, of clandestine activities or of violence in relation to the Trans Mountain project, Paterson said.

“While some opponents of the pipeline were arrested during protest for breaching a court order, that was a matter for police and the courts, and was done out in the open — it should not be a matter for our spy agency.”

Given past interest on the part of security and police officials, the CSIS brief is not surprising, said Tegan Hansen, a spokeswoman for Protect the Inlet, an Indigenous-led effort against the pipeline and tanker project.

But she is curious as to why the spy service document makes reference to sabotage and violent physical confrontations.

“I’m not sure why they’re trying to draw that connection with violence,” Hansen said. “I’d be interested to know. But it’s certainly not our intention to ever pursue violence.”

The Canadian Press, Nov 6. 2018

[SOURCE]

Teepees start to come down at Justice For Our Stolen Children Camp near Saskatchewan legislature

Tepees are seen at the Justice For Our Stolen Children Camp near the Saskatchewan legislature, in Regina, in a June 27, 2018. (File photo CP)

Teepees are coming down at the Justice For Our Stolen Children Camp on the grounds of the Saskatchewan legislature in Regina.

On Friday, Justice Ysanne Wilkinson ordered that the protest camp be dismantled after the government applied for an eviction order.

“Police are hereby authorized to arrest, or arrest and remove, any person” who is violating the order to vacate the camp, she said.

No deadline was specified in Wilkinson’s order to take the camp down.

The province went to court seeking an order to evict the protesters, arguing the camp violated bylaws and made it hard to maintain the land across from the legislature.

Regina police say they are now in talks with the government and protesters.

Fifteen teepees were standing in front of the Saskatchewan legislature building.

There had been 15 teepees in the camp at one point, but that number was down to 10 by Monday morning.

At least two of the tepees came down after the court order, while others were taken down for the annual Treaty 4 Gathering in Fort Qu’Appelle, Sask.

Protester Richelle Dubois says it’s disheartening to see the number of teepees shrink.

“It shows the province’s true colours and how they feel about First Nation children and communities,” she said.

Since late February, the campers have been protesting racial injustice and the disproportionate number of Indigenous children in care.

The Canadian Press