AEL Advocacy is seeking permission to intervene in a case before the Ontario Court of Appeal. This case concerns the constitutionality of certain provisions in the Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act, 2020 and Ontario Regulation 701/20 (collectively, the “Legislation”). This Legislation has been widely criticized for its restrictive measures on undercover investigations at farms and slaughterhouses, efforts critical to exposing both animal cruelty and environmental violations.
The Threat of Ag-Gag Legislation
Often referred to as “ag-gag” laws (short for agricultural gag), this type of legislation aims to suppress whistleblowers and investigative journalists who shine a light on harmful practices within the animal agriculture industry. These laws obstruct transparency, limiting public awareness of systemic animal cruelty and the environmental degradation associated with industrial farming. Notable cases of abuse, such as the cruelty at the Chilliwack dairy farm in British Columbia and at the Millbank Fur Farm in Ontario, were only exposed through undercover investigations. Without these efforts, such practices would remain hidden, perpetuating harm to animals and the environment alike.
About the Appeal
The appeal arises from an April 2024 ruling by Koehnen J. of the Ontario Superior Court, which struck down several provisions of the Legislation for infringing on the right to freedom of expression under section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The court declared these provisions to be of no force and effect, opening the door for activists to continue their essential work of documenting abuses within the animal agriculture industry.
Key provisions of the Legislation criminalized entering agricultural facilities without consent, particularly under false pretenses—a tactic often necessary to expose systemic abuses. Justice Koehnen’s decision is a critical victory for animal and environmental justice, affirming the essential role of investigative reporting in holding the animal agriculture industry accountable.
AEL Advocacy’s Planned Intervention
If granted leave to intervene, AEL Advocacy plans to argue that the Legislation undermines not only animal welfare advocacy but also environmental accountability. The impugned provisions hinder environmental advocates’ ability to use legal tools, such as those provided under Ontario’s Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993, to document and challenge ecological harm caused by animal agriculture.
Industrial farming is a major driver of environmental degradation in Ontario, contributing to water pollution, habitat destruction, and greenhouse gas emissions. The Legislation’s restrictions limit access to the evidence needed to expose these harms, silencing critical voices and reducing public oversight of practices that affect both animals and ecosystems.
AEL Advocacy’s submissions will emphasize the interconnectedness of animal welfare and environmental protection, highlighting the urgent need for transparency to address these overlapping crises.
This case represents a pivotal moment for both animal and environmental justice in Ontario. By intervening, AEL Advocacy seeks to ensure the court fully considers the broad societal implications of ag-gag laws, which threaten to shield harmful practices from scrutiny. Transparency is not just a cornerstone of animal welfare but a fundamental necessity for environmental stewardship and public health.
Thank you to The Pollination Project for making this work possible!
Comments