Courts and politicians should be convicting and putting criminals behind bars and leaving issues of Canada's makeup and governance to the voters.
Alberta Says Judge’s Criticism of Petition Bill Amounts to Interference
If Quebec can separate, so can Alberta and any other province that wants to get away from the stink of the Federal government.
Isaac Teo
12/7/2025|Updated: 12/7/2025
The Alberta government says a provincial judge’s comment on a new bill aimed at removing barriers to citizen-initiated petitions interferes with the democratic process.
Heather Jenkins, press secretary to Alberta Justice Minister Mickey Amery, was referring to a Dec. 5 decision by Court of King’s Bench Justice Colin Feasby in which he noted that Bill 14, the Justice Statutes Amendment Act, 2025, could potentially silence the court.
Introduced by Alberta’s United Conservative Party government on Dec. 4, Bill 14 proposes to remove the ability of the province’s chief electoral officer to refer citizen-initiated questions to the courts, transferring that authority to the justice minister.
If the bill had passed prior to the court making its decision, that would have stopped the court proceedings, said Justice Feasby, whose ruling was on a case seeking a legal review of a proposed separation-referendum question posed as part of the province’s efforts to reduce delays for citizen-initiated petitions.
Jenkins says Feasby’s comments, which came less than 24 hours after Amery tabled the bill, amounted to interference.
“Justice Feasby’s decision includes comments that are critical of a bill currently before the Legislative Assembly. The separation of powers is an important constitutional principle. The Assembly has been elected by the people of Alberta to freely debate and pass legislation in the public interest. Judicial statements about the merits of a proposed bill before the legislative branch interfere with well-established democratic processes,” Jenkins told The Epoch Times in a Dec. 6 email.‘
Gatekeepers’
The judge had been hearing arguments since late July on the constitutionality of the proposed referendum on Alberta separating from Canada. On Dec. 5, he ruled that the question proposed by sovereignty advocacy group Alberta Prosperity Project (APP) was unconstitutional, as it would go against the Charter, First Nations Treaty rights and the province’s existing referendum law.
The APP’s proposed question asks Albertans: “Do you agree that the Province of Alberta shall become a sovereign country and cease to be a province in Canada?”
Had Bill 14 passed before Feasby’s ruling was released, it would have halted the legal review of the APP’s question. The APP filed its application in early July, but the process was delayed after Alberta’s chief electoral officer Gordon McClure on July 28 referred the proposed question to the court to assess its constitutionality.
“Legislating to pre-emptively end this court proceeding disrespects the administration of justice,” Feasby wrote in his Dec. 5 decision.
“Contrary to the pending [Bill 14], this case cannot be discontinued, and the Court cannot be silenced because the case has been decided,” the judge added. “These reasons are delivered despite the anticipated change to the law because reason giving is democratic.”
Alberta Premier Danielle Smith says citizens seeking an independence referendum shouldn’t have “a whole pile of gatekeepers,” such as the courts, standing in their way.
“Citizen-initiated referendum is supposed to be permissive,” Smith said, when asked to respond to Feasby’s comments during her radio call-in show on Dec. 6.
“What we’ve been observing is whether it’s the chief electoral officer or the court, they seem to want to approve the ones they like and hold up the ones they don’t like, and that’s not democracy.”
The premier added that she concurred with Amery’s view that Bill 14 would create a “permissive” environment for Albertans to bring forward important issues, such as referendum questions, thereby upholding democracy.
Bill 14
Bill 14 proposes a range of changes to existing legislation. In addition to transferring the authority from the province’s chief electoral officer to the justice minister when it comes to referring citizen-initiated questions to the courts, it includes halting any active court cases brought by the chief electoral officer concerning citizens’ initiatives.
It also allows applicants whose petitions were referred to the courts to resubmit their applications within 30 days of the bill taking effect, without any additional cost.
Moreover, the bill proposes an amendment to Alberta’s Referendum Act, establishing that the provincial government is not required to implement the results of a referendum if doing so would contravene the Constitution of Canada. As well, the bill would place restrictions on political party names by proposing changes to the Election Finances and Contributions Disclosure Act.
After the bill was tabled, Amery said his government wants to ensure that when citizens submit petition proposals, the “process is free from delays,” and that people can bring forward important issues as petitions.
Speaking to reporters on Dec. 4 after the bill was tabled, Alberta NDP deputy leader Rakhi Pancholi accused the UCP government of undermining the rule of law by introducing the new legislation.
“There are so many pieces in here that are problematic and should be of deep concern to all Albertans,” Pancholi said. “As the Official Opposition, we will object fiercely to this piece of legislation.”
In his Dec. 5 ruling, Feasby noted that his decision doesn’t imply that the Constitution can’t be amended or that Alberta cannot hold a separation referendum. He said Alberta’s Citizen Initiative Act (CIA) does not provide the required tools for a separation referendum, as it needs citizen petitions to comply with the Constitution while secession, by definition, would violate it by requiring a new one.
“This decision only stands for the proposition that Alberta in the CIA did not give citizens the power to initiate a referendum on the question of independence from Canada,” he wrote.
Jenkins, in her emailed statement to The Epoch Times, said the Alberta government “strongly disagrees” with the judge’s interpretation of the “current” CIA, noting that his decision “would bar a citizen-initiated referendum even in cases where a proposal aims to amend the constitution through lawful means.”
She added that his decision would have “no practical impact” once the legislature passes Bill 14.
“That bill will clarify and simplify the rules relating to citizen-initiated petitions, making the process more efficient, and encouraging citizen participation in our democracy,” the press secretary said.
Separatists’ Response
Addressing supporters in a Dec. 5 statement, the Alberta Prosperity Project said the sovereignty advocacy group wasn’t “particularly surprised” by Feasby’s decision and urged the provincial government to make the changes needed to allow a separation referendum question.
“Bill 14 will fix some of the problems, but we urge the Smith government to read Justice Feasby’s decision and make the required adjustments,” said Jeffrey Rath, the constitutional lawyer representing the group’s CEO Mitch Sylvestre.
“I am pleased that both the conclusion of the court proceeding and Bill 14 will allow Mitch Sylvestre and Albertans for a Free and Independent Alberta to start gathering petition signatures in January,” Rath said.
Carolina Avendano and The Canadian Press contributed to this report. |
