Two men have retained legal representation and are asking Calgary Transit to clarify their charges, saying they were ticketed after they had a private conversation while on their way to Calgary’s 1 Million March 4 Children protest last month.
The conversation had allegedly interfered with the “comfort” of another transit user. A city bylaw prohibits anyone on transit property from engaging in activity that would “interfere with the comfort, convenience, or quiet use and enjoyment of the transit system of any reasonable person.”
One of the men was handcuffed after exiting the Calgary C-Train and both were served with a court summons by transit authorities. The incident occurred while the men were on their way to Calgary’s 1 Million March 4 Children protest last month.
Both men, who are scheduled to appear in court in late November, will be represented by The Democracy Fund (TDF), a charitable Canadian organization that provides legal funding related to civil liberties litigation.
TDF said that although the train was mostly empty, the conversation was overheard and reported to transit authorities. The men were detained by transit officers after exiting the train and were not allowed to leave until the identity of the man who was handcuffed could be confirmed.
A spokeswoman for Calgary Transit said it could not comment on a matter while it was ongoing before the courts.
According to TDF’s litigation director, lawyer Alan Honner, the specified penalty for the alleged offence is $300.
Calgary Bylaw
Calgary also introduced a new bylaw outlawing “discriminatory protests near public facilities” in March to include public pools, recreation centres, and libraries. The new “Safe & Inclusive Access Bylaw” follows protests about drag queen story hour events for children at public libraries.Trend
TDF said the latest tickets are part of an emerging trend of new city bylaws “that punish private communications that are controversial but not criminal.”The bylaw includes a definition of a “graphic image” as “an image or photograph showing, or purporting to show a fetus or any part of a fetus.”
“The narrow definition of a graphic image begs the question of whether council is trying to restrict pro-life expression,” says Mr. Honner. “Why else would only images of fetuses, no matter how benign, be restricted?”
Delivery of such images is regulated with rules such as delivering the image in a sealed envelope, marking it with the sender’s name and address, and placing a warning about a graphic image on the envelope or package.
TDF said other places, such as Edmonton, and Waterloo, Ont., have passed “almost identical bylaws” that regulate private communications on municipal property.
In Waterloo, as of Oct. 27, a bylaw prohibits “communicating, causing or permitting communication” with any person in a way that makes that person “reasonably” feel harassed on municipal property.
“The definition of harassed includes, among other things, feeling troubled, worried or experiencing objectionable comments,” said TDF.
Mr. Honner appeared before council to speak against the bylaw, which was ultimately passed and will come into effect on Jan. 1, 2024.
TDF said municipal documents indicated that Waterloo modelled its bylaw after Edmonton’s.
“The regional municipality says they have a problem with discrimination,” says Mr. Honner. “Unfortunately, councillors decided to copy the wording of a deeply flawed Edmonton bylaw rather than make their own efforts to combat discrimination.
