CCLA on the Supreme Court of Canada’s Ruling in the Working Families Case: An Important Victory for Democracy

TORONTO – On March 7, 2025, Anaïs Bussières McNicoll, Director of the Fundamental Freedoms program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association (CCLA), made the following statement further to the release of the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC)’s ruling in the Ontario (Attorney General) v. Working Families Coalition (Canada) Inc. case:

Today’s majority decision from the SCC striking down provisions of Ontario’s Election Finances Act is an important victory for democracy. The challenged provisions limit third-party electoral advertising for an entire year prior to an election. The majority of the SCC found that these limits infringe democratic rights protected under s. 3 of the Charter because they allow political parties to drown out the voices of third parties on political issues during an entire year of legislative activity.

Consistent with CCLA’s submissions as intervener, the majority of the SCC adopted a broad approach to the right to vote protection. The majority confirmed that citizens’ right to vote in an informed way—which is foundational to the health of the electoral system—requires that citizens be able to hear viewpoints and other information from third parties, candidates, and political parties. The majority found that spending limits will infringe s. 3 of the Charter if they allow any political actor or third party a disproportionate voice in the political discourse given their role in the electoral process.

CCLA’s intervention highlighted the structural conflict of interest that stems from the self-interest of legislators in ensuring that the election laws they enact serve their political objectives. We argued that, given this potential for partisan self-dealing, robust judicial review is needed to ensure that the legislature’s means go no further than is necessary to achieve legitimate countervailing objectives. The majority of the SCC echoed this line of argument by stating that courts must examine legislative choices more closely where rights at the heart of democracy are at stake.

Based on this approach, the majority concluded that Ontario’s infringement on s. 3 rights was not reasonable in a free and democratic society. That is because the length of the impugned spending limits far surpassed what was reasonably necessary to protect the integrity of the election process, or the primary role of political parties in the electoral process.

Today’s decision is the final step of a complex series of events in which the CCLA has been involved since the very beginning. In a previous proceeding, the Ontario Superior Court of Justice struck down Ontario’s third-party spending limits on the basis that they unreasonably violated freedom of expression. Instead of amending these limits to comply with the Charter, the Ontario government invoked the notwithstanding clause, which allows legislatures to override important Charter-protected rights for a duration of 5 years. This led the Working Families Coalition to institute a new challenge, this time arguing that these provisions also infringe democratic rights (s. 3), which are not subject to the notwithstanding clause.

It is profoundly regrettable that the Ontario government chose to use the notwithstanding clause to override freedom of expression. Today’s decision from the SCC, recognizing that the provisions also infringe democratic rights, is a silver lining at the end of a long saga. This ruling reminds us all of the importance of the courts’ mission to protect people’s Charter rights from government overreach.

CCLA is grateful for the excellent pro bono representation of David Rankin and Lindsay Rauccio of Osler, Hoskin and Harcourt LLP in this matter.