The Latest

Canadians finally have a serious and knowledgeable report on how to fix our woeful federal whistleblower protection law – the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act (PSDPA), found by the International Bar Association to the be among the worst on the planet.

In its final report on challenges faced by Canadian libraries in 2025, the Centre for Free Expression presents data reported in 2025 by public, school, and academic libraries on demands for removal or relocation of materials in their collections; cancellation of their programs; concerns about exhibits and displays; and objections to making available library space to community groups. The most notable finding is that of the 502 such challenges reported in 2025, 360 were the result of an Order issued by Alberta's Minister of Education to all school authorities in the province for their school libraries to remove graphic novels for young adults he felt inappropriate because of sexual content -- despite them having been consistent with school board library policies and most being highly respected, award-winning books. This is the largest book ban in Canadian history.

CFE Intervener Factum in the Supreme Court of Canada – This appeal is a significant test of Ontario’s anti-SLAPP legislation, balancing corporate reputation with the right of consumers to share online feedback. Originally the homeowners’ anti-SLAPP motion to dismiss the defamation suit brought by Benchwood Builders (the plaintiff) was granted, but later it was revered by the Ontario Court of Appeal. The crucial “weighing” test under the legislation is that the plaintiff, to avoid having the case dismissed, must show that the harm caused by the expression at issue is “sufficiently serious” to outweigh the public interest in protecting the defendant's expression. The plaintiff must also meet a “merits” test satisfying the court that it was seriously harmed by the expression and that the defendant has “no valid defense.” The merits stage often requires a complex and resource-intensive analysis. The Centre for Free Expression was granted leave to intervene. CFE submits that the motion’s judge can expedite anti-SLAPP cases, once the required public interest test has been met by the defendant in the underlying case, by addressing the “weighing” test first. If it is not found in the plaintiff’s favour, the motions judge can be relieved, or can deal with more cursorily, with the often more complex and resource-intensive merits-based analysis. CFE also submits that corporate plaintiffs alleging defamation must show a link between the impugned expression and pecuniary loss to meet their burden of demonstrative “serious harm.”

Today, the Centre for Free Expression, along with 13 other civil liberties and human rights organizations, sent an open letter to the Prime Minister, key Cabinet ministers, and leaders of opposition parties calling for the withdrawal of the Government’s “Lawful Access” Bill C-22 that is being whisked through Parliament at a pace assuring it can be given no serious consideration.