Hogan's news quotes can't be used as evidence against his gender-identity policy, judge rules
However, province's own news releases are admissible
A judge has ruled that news reporting about certain statements made by Education Minister Bill Hogan on Policy 713 cannot be used in court.
The Canadian Civil Liberties Association is challenging the school gender-identity policy, which now requires parental consent before school staff can use a child's chosen name and pronoun, if they're under 16.
The association wanted to introduce as evidence CBC reporting on Hogan saying Policy 713 doesn't apply to nicknames and that only gender-related changes need parental consent.
On Aug. 23, 2023, Hogan called a news conference where he specified that, "What we're talking about is a name that's attached to a different gender than what they're identified with with their parents."
He also said if teachers are uncertain about what is a nickname and what is a gender-related name change, they "can always ask."
In court, the province's lawyers said the news reporting, as well as the province's own news releases around the issue, were not relevant or reliable evidence.
On Thursday, Justice Richard Petrie ruled that news reporting of things said by Hogan can't stand as direct statements from him, and media reports aren't reliable enough to be used as evidence in that way.
Petrie ruled that the province's own news releases are admissible and can stand.
The province's lawyers also asked the judge to exclude a right to information response signed by the deputy minister.
The response shows that from 2020 to May 25, 2023, the Department of Education received no written complaints from parents alleging the school was keeping them in the dark about their children's preferred pronouns.
The judge ruled that the response is an official government document and can't be excluded from evidence.
Benjamin Perryman, one of the lawyers representing the civil liberties association, said the purpose of this entire case is to get a judge to review the information that was before Hogan when he made the changes to the policy.
After reviewing the record, the judge would then rule on whether the minister's changes were against the provincial Education Act and Human Rights Act, as well as the Charter.
Perryman said there is little information about why the minister made the changes he made. He said the media reporting was one way to show the minister's own words and reasoning.
"We are still trying to understand why the minister made the decisions that he made, given the complete lack of foundation and reasons," he said.
The case, which has been going through preliminary processes for more than a year, still has a few hurdles to cross before the judge can begin the outright review.
In court, lawyers and the judge discussed possible dates for hearings in January and March of next year, but did not finalize any.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
