Denial of media’s access to inmate for purpose of interview was reasonable

Federal court | Charter of Rights

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Denial of media’s access to inmate for purpose of interview was reasonable

Application by three media companies for judicial review of decision of prison warden who refused their request to interview inmate named OK. Applicants created joint enterprise for purpose of interviewing OK to produce documentary film about his story. Request was denied because it would result in significant disruptions to institution and it would endanger its security. Inmates would have to be confined to their living units for duration of interview and this would affect work, school and other program routines and if interview was conducted outside business hours it would disrupt inmates’ access to leisure activities. This could spark unrest among inmate population. OK kept low profile at institution but release of interview would result in additional security concerns within institution and safety concerns for OK. At issue were rights of applicants to freedom of expression under s. 2(b) of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and public’s right to know. Application dismissed. Decision to deny applicants’ access to OK for purpose of interview was reasonable and sufficient reasons were provided for that decision. Right to freedom of expression was not absolute and it was subject to reasonable limits. In context of penitentiary this right had to be balanced against need to protect security of institution and safety of persons, which included staff, prison population and any particular inmate. Penitentiaries were heavily restricted environments and members of public could only enter to visit inmates under very strict conditions. Penitentiary was not place where public had expectation of exercising its right to freedom of expression. Warden was called upon to balance freedom of expression against security and safety imperatives. She had experience and expertise to make such discretionary decisions and her decision was owed significant deference.
Canadian Broadcasting Corp. v. Warden of Bowden Institution (Feb. 13, 2015, F.C., Richard G. Mosley J., File No. T-1651-14) 119 W.C.B. (2d) 465.

Free newsletter

Our newsletter is FREE and keeps you up to date on all the developments in the Ontario legal community. Please enter your email address below to subscribe.

Recent articles & video

Modern family arrangements, multi-jurisdictional presence raising estates complexity, say lawyers

Ontario Superior Court of Justice dismisses joint tenant's application to order property's sale

Ontario Court of Appeal allows statement of claim amendment in Bayer personal injury case

Ontario’s response to COVID’s long-term-care crisis lacks an ‘easy fix,’ says elder law lawyer

With more lawyers doing pro bono, profession can meet access-to-justice gap, says Lynn Burns

Ontario Superior Court orders costs for unreasonable conduct and bad faith in child support case

Most Read Articles

Occupier negligent in failing to timely salt icy roadway: Ont. CA

Ontario Superior Court orders costs for unreasonable conduct and bad faith in child support case

Ontario Bar Association launches peer support network for lawyers living with disabilities

Ontario’s response to COVID’s long-term-care crisis lacks an ‘easy fix,’ says elder law lawyer