ALBERTA PRESS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 23044, 23 May 1938, Page 6

ALBERTA PRESS

EFFORT TO CONTROL . HIGH COURT'S DECISION • MEASURE ULTRA VIRES [from our OWN correspondent] OTTAWA, April 24 The Supreme Court of Canada, in its judgment which declared ultra vire* the Alberta Social Credit Act, and a number of bills based on that piece of legislation, paid considerable attention to the Alberta newspaper bill—"an Act," it was called, "to ensure the publication of accurate news and information." This bill provided that any newspaper in Alberta, when required to do so by the Social Credit liosprd, must publish in its panes "any statement furnished by the chairman of the board which has for its object the correction or amplification of any statement re- ' lating to any policy or activity of the government of the province." Furthermore, the newspaper had to furnished on demand the source of any information or statement made in its columns or the name and address of the writer pi any editorial or news item. Penalties lor failure to comply with any order of the chairman included suspension of the newpaper either for a delinite time or until further order. No action for libel was to exist on account of the publication of any material furnished by the chairman. Free Discussion of Affairs The Court was unanimous in holding the bill ultra vires, but two judgmenta were written on this point. The first, signed "by Chief Justice Duff and Mr. Justice Davis, said in part: "The preamble of the British North America Act shows plainly enough that the constitution of the Dominion ia to be similar in principle to that of the United Kingdom. The statute contemplates a Parliament working under the influence of public opinion and public discussion. There can be no question that such institutions derive their efficacy from the free discussion of affairs, from criticism and answer and counter-criticism, from attack upon policy and and defence and counter-attack; from the freest and fullest analysis and examination from every point of view of* political proposajs. "This is Bignallv true in respect to the discharge by Ministers of the Crown of their responsibility to Parliament, by members of Parliament of their duty to the electors, and by the electors themselves of their responsibilities in the election of their representatives. i

Chairman's Autocratic Powers "The right of public discussion is, of course, subject to legal restrictions; those based upon considerations of. decency and public order, and others' conceived for the protection of various private and public . interests. Even within its legal limits it is liable to abuse —grave abuse. * "Such abuse is constantly exemplified before our eyes; but it is axiomatic that the practice of this right of free public discussion ,of public affairs, notwithstanding the incidental mischiefs, is the breath of life for Parliamentary institutions. . . "The legislation now under consideration manifestly places in the hands of the chairman of the Social Credit Board autocratic powers which, it may well be thought, if arbitrarily welded, could be employed to frustrate in Alberta rights of the Crown and the people of Canada as a whole." Points from Separate Judgment And from a separate judgement written by Mr. Justice Cannon these extracts are taken: — . "Under the British system, which is ours, no political party can erect a prohibitory barrier to prevent the electors from getting information concerning the policy of the Government. Freedom of discussion is essential to enlighten public opinion in a democratic State; it cannot be curtailed without affecting the right of the., people to be informed through sources independent of the Government concerning matters of public interest. There must be untrammelled publication of the news and political opinions of the political parties contending for-ascend-ancy. » . , . "Democracy cannot be maintained without its foundation: free public opinion and free discussion throughout the nation of all matters affecting the State, within the limits set by the criminal code and the common law. Every inhabitant of Alberta is also a citizen of the Dominion. The province may deal with his property, and civil rights of a local and private nature within the province, but the province cannot interfere with his status as a Canadian citizen, and his fundamental right to express freely his untrammelled opinion about Government po.icies and discuss matters of public concern." .