RSS FeedCanada Goes for Another Hockey Gold
Hot on the heels of the victorious Canadian women’s hockey team is the men’s team, which is aiming for its own hockey gold. The game against the rival United States promises to be an Olympic classic!
Beginning at 12:15 p.m. PST (3:15 p.m. EST), you can watch USA v. Canada online at CTV’s Olympics website. The site offers full HD streaming video, which is perfect for me, since I don’t have a TV. The link to the video is here.
And since this is a law blog, I’ll see if I can do a haphazard legal tie-in to end this post.
If you ever had any doubt that hockey was one of Canada’s true national sports — not just lacrosse — check out the National Sports of Canada Act, S.C. 1994, c. 16. The Act provides:
2. The game commonly known as ice hockey is hereby recognized and declared to be the national winter sport of Canada and the game commonly known as lacrosse is hereby recognized and declared to be the national summer sport of Canada.
Another sign that Canadians are obsessed with hockey: have a look at how many times “hockey” comes up on a CanLII case law search. I come up with over 7000 results, beginning with a case called Hockey v. Hockey from the BC Court of Appeal. You can’t get much more Canadian than that!!
Go Team Canada!
Female Ski Jumpers Refused Leave to Appeal
In what must feel like a complete let down only two months before the 2010 Olympics in Vancouver, the Supreme Court of Canada has refused a leave of appeal by a group of female ski jumpers who are demanding for equality with hopes that they too will be allowed to compete alongside their male counterparts in February. The SCC did not release any reasons for their decision.
The women’s lawyer, called the decision a case of “textbook discrimination.”
The trials and tribulations began when the women launched a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission. When that failed, they pursued a court action.
The IOC voted not to include women’s ski jumping at the 2010 Winter Olympics because the sport didn’t meet the necessary criteria for inclusion. The IOC requires that a sport must have contested at least two world championships before it can become an Olympic event. There are also rules dictating how far in advance a sport can be added to the Olympic program.
Canadian Charter vs. Olympic Charter
Vancouver Sun » “The IOC is accountable to no one — as female ski jumpers now know“:
When the B.C. Court of Appeal tossed out the complaint from the female ski jumpers last week, it also clarified who actually calls the shots regarding both the 2010 Winter Games and the Olympic movement.
Not the host governments of Canada, B.C. and Vancouver. Not the Vancouver Organizing Committee or Vanoc. Not the taxpayers who are helping to underwrite the Games to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
“The ultimate governing authority of the Olympic movement,” wrote the trio of appeal court judges, “is the International Olympic Committee (IOC), a non-governmental not-for-profit organization with headquarters in Switzerland.”
[...]
But no one should have any illusions about their role in the Olympic scheme of things. “All of these organizations are under the supreme authority of the IOC.”
Under the supreme authority of the IOC. Has an unmistakably autocratic ring, doesn’t it? The judges didn’t coin it. The phrase is right there in the Olympic charter.
In terms of what that authority means here in B.C., a lower court found earlier this year that notwithstanding the presence of a government-appointed board, Vanoc is under the “day-to-day control” of the IOC.
“Vanoc did not make the decision to exclude women’s ski jumping from the 2010 Games,” a B.C. Supreme Court judge ruled. “Vanoc did not support that decision. Vanoc does not have the power to remedy it.”
[...]
That finding cleared the way for the judges to rule that the anti-discrimination provisions of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms are not engaged by the circumstances in this case. The Charter applies to “all matters within the authority of parliament (and) to the legislature and government of each province.”
The court found that the “supreme” IOC is beyond the reach of either. “The decision of the IOC not to add women’s ski jumping as an event is not a policy that could be or was made by any Canadian government,” wrote the judges. “The charter cannot be so broadly construed as to include policies or practices that no Canadian government has jurisdiction to enact or change.”
Women Ski Jumpers Grounded…
The BC Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal filed on behalf of a number of a group of women ski jumpers attempting to get inclusion into next years olympics being held in Vancouver. Written statements were not given, but will be available next week.
Previously, the BC Superior Court ruled that although there are definite Charter breaches and discrimination is evident, they do not apply to the Swiss based International Olympic Committee. On behalf of the women ski jumpers, they argue because the women’s event is not yet a recognized sport, they are under the jurisdiction of VANOC (Vancouver Olympic Committee), which as a Canadian organization is bound by the Charter.
There is no word to whether this will be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Should they continue to the SCC and win the IOC will be forced into one of three options:
1. Include them
2. Cancel the men’s event.
3. Hold the men’s event outside Canada, so the Charter does not apply, and they can hold only the men’s event.
As the eleventh hour of the games near, if they decide to go to the SCC, expect a quick turnaround.
B.C. introduces law blasted by critics as means to hide homeless for Games
B.C. introduces law blasted by critics as means to hide homeless for Games
The B.C. government introduced a controversial law Thursday that will allow police to take homeless people to shelters in extreme weather, but won’t give officers the power to force them to stay.
[...]
A draft version of the law leaked earlier this fall revealed the government was considering allowing police to take the homeless to local jails, but that has been dropped.[Housing and Social Development Minister] Coleman said he expects the law could be the subject of a court challenge.
It will be the first of its kind in Canada.
Despite Coleman’s assurances that homeless people have the right to refuse entry to a shelter, the proposed law could backfire and result in the homeless hiding from police in extreme weather, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association said.
CBC: UBC students tutored on Olympic security rights
I’ve already posted about PIVOT’s and the BC Civil Liberties Association’s mobilisation around Vancouver’s stringent (and possibly unconstitutional) anti-dissent Olympic laws. It now appears that UBC students (undergrads, I think) are now also taking it upon themselves to educate themselves on their rights with respect to the Olympics and how it’ll impact them (given UBC is where some of the games will be conducted, and thus site to both heightened security and protests).
Some University of British Columbia students will be getting extra tutoring to make sure they know their rights when the Integrated Security Unit arrives on campus for the 2010 Winter Olympics in February.
About 330 students are to be trained to staff a legal assistance hotline or act as observers of security operations during the Games. The Student Legal Fund Society has teamed up with the B.C. Civil Liberties Association to host the workshops.
Organizers of the workshops expect that some students will be involved in protests both on and off the campus, where UBC is hosting ice hockey events at the newly expanded Thunderbird Arena.
Emily Griffiths, president of the Student Legal Fund Society, said the group will put up more than $18,000 to train students, stressing that this isn’t about encouraging them to protest but about making sure their rights are protected.
“Because of the nature of the Olympics and the way that it affects students on campus and the ways that students on campus have been treated in the past by law enforcement, we are very nervous,” said Griffiths.
Memories of APEC
Griffiths was referring to the 1997 Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation conference at UBC, when students protesting against several unelected national leaders were pepper-sprayed by the RCMP, and signs urging free speech and democracy were destroyed by police.
The police action led to the creation of the Student Legal Fund, to which each UBC student pays an annual fee, and to a public inquiry which found that police actions “did not meet an acceptable and expected standard of competence and professionalism and proficiency.”
B.C. Civil Liberties Association executive director David Eby said his organization also is putting up $18,000 to fund the student training.
“Our proposal is to provide know-your-rights workshops and legal observer training for students to do legal observing on campus during the Olympic period,” said Eby, “so that students are fully prepared during the Olympic period so we avoid another APEC-type situation.”
The Vancouver 2010 Integrated Security Unit is headed by the RCMP and includes members of the Canadian Forces and municipal police departments.
Anti-Anti-Olympic Bylaw in BC Unconstitutional?
The CBC reports: Anti-Olympic signs could mean jail: rights group (Oct 9):
A proposed B.C. law would allow municipal officials to enter homes to seize unauthorized and possibly anti-Olympic signs on short notice, civil libertarians say.
Violators could be fined up to $10,000 a day and jailed up to six months, the B.C. Civil Liberties Association said Friday.
The BC Civil Liberties Association has launched a court challenge:
Earlier this week, the association helped two anti-Olympics activists launch a legal challenge of Vancouver’s 2010 Olympics bylaw in B.C. Supreme Court, claiming it was an unconstitutional restriction on free speech.
[...]
The association is suspicious of the timing of the provincial bill’s introduction so close to the Olympic games, which have been planned for years.
“We’ve seen them timing things so that they don’t put in place laws that are special to the Olympics until the last minute,” Holmes said. “And part of that leads to the suspicion that they’ve done it in a calculated and deliberate way, to remove the ability of the courts, and people who might want to take it to court, to have their rights protected.”
The BCCLA has their statement of claim up on their website:
“Going to Court on a clear-cut free expression issue is a waste of time and money,” said Westergard-Thorpe. “We’ve all got better things to do, but if the City insists on passing bad bylaws, people who value free speech have no choice but to stand up and challenge them.”
Vancouver 2010 and Civil Liberties
The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association and Pivot Legal Society are looking for volunteers for Legal Observer teams during the Olympics. They’ll be having training sessions (in fact, their training manual is already online (PDF)):
Legal Observer teams will be observing major protests and other potential conflict hot spots like Olympic venues and the Downtown Eastside. They’ll report observations back to the BCCLA’s team of volunteer lawyers who are prepared to go to court to protect people’s rights where complaints can’t be resolved informally. Our Observers’ first-hand evidence will form a solid foundation for those legal actions. Observers are the watchful eyes that will be focused on police, military and private security conduct to ensure accountability.
The BCCLA has a pretty good roundup of reasons to be concerned about how the Olympics are negatively impacting civil rights:
- The Olympic Torch Run Manual that calls on cities to limit the distribution of political leaflets during the torch run.
- The Clean Venue Agreement that outlines a VANOC swat team that will seize offensive literature on public property, how the IOC required VANOC to prevent anyone other than Olympic sponsors from advertising during the Games, and how private security guards will prevent people from holding signs or wearing clothes with political messages in Olympic venues.
- The Olympic Host City Agreement in which the IOC required the City of Vancouver to prevent international media and attendees at Olympic venues from seeing political speech inside and outside the venues, which was signed by then Mayor of Vancouver Larry Campbell.
- The Olympic Charter in which the IOC dictates at Rule 51 that “No kind of demonstration or political, religious or racial propaganda is permitted in any Olympic sites, venues or other areas. “
- The Manual for Candidate Cities which demands compliance with the terms of the Olympic Charter for all candidate host cities, including Vancouver, during and after the bid process.
- The Olympic Technical Manual on Media, in which the IOC attempts to limit coverage of the Games to coverage that “by its content, spreads and promotes the principles of Olympism,” and which grants the IOC the ability to withdraw accreditation from any journalist at any time for any reason.
- Letters in which the Olympic Integrated Security Unit and Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) refuse to refrain from using Agents Provocateur or to assume the leadership of activist organizations, following a request from the B.C. Civil Liberties Association to foreswear the tactics. Such tactics may be permissible under certain interpretations of Canadian criminal and constitutional law, but their legality is disputed by the BCCLA.
