Dear Editor.
Jason G. Antonio’s May 13 article about the proposed safe access zone law to protect patients at facilities that provide abortion was quite one-sided. It extensively quoted an anti-abortion lawyer and the head of Moose Jaw Right to Life but quoted no-one in response. The reporter just took a couple of quotes from the press release of NDP MLA Jennifer Bowes, who introduced the bill.
The comments by the two anti-choice spokespeople ignored existing legal precedent. The BC Court of Appeal ruled in 2008 (R. v. Spratt, 2008 BCCA 340) that the province’s Access to Abortion Services Act was constitutional because women’s right to access a necessary medical treatment in an atmosphere of privacy, safety and dignity took precedence over freedom of expression in that specific context. A key part of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Section 1, allows fundamental rights to be limited in a reasonable manner to protect other rights. Protesters are free to protest anywhere except within a narrow zone around facilities that provide abortion.
When the BC protesters appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada back in 2008, it declined to take the case, meaning BC’s law stands as constitutional. Since 2015, safe access zone laws have passed in five other provinces, all inspired by BC’s law. Saskatchewan’s bill also closely follows the BC law. Regarding the pending legal challenge to Ontario’s law, I’m confident that law will be upheld based on BC’s legal precedent. Safe access zone laws represent a sound balancing of rights.
Thank you,
Joyce Arthur
Executive Director Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC)
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, and do not necessarily reflect the position of this publication.
