Canadian Constitution Foundation granted intervener status in Supreme Court freedom of association case

by jw news 2017 2 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  jw news 2017

  

  http://www.wireservice.ca/index.php?module=News&func=display&sid=21781

  "Media Release: Canadian Constitution Foundation granted intervener status in Supreme Court freedom of association case

  Today, the Supreme Court of Canada granted the CCF's motion to intervene in a case that will have profound implications for all private civil society organizations, and particularly religious congregations...

  ... The plaintiff was expelled – “disfellowshipped” – from Calgary’s Highwood Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses in April, 2014,...

  ... What is at stake?

  The narrow question before the court will be whether courts have jurisdiction to review the membership decisions of religious congregations. More broadly, the court will have to consider to what extent the state can intervene in the internal processes of private organizations..."

  Quoted text and screenshot from the web page :

  http://www.wireservice.ca/index.php?module=News&func=display&sid=21781
• 

  search

  There remains one intervenor application undecided. The following have been approved:

  SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH IN CANADA, THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS IN CANADA, CANADIAN COUNCIL OF CHRISTIAN CHARITIES, THE ASSOCIATION FOR REFORMED POLITICAL ACTION CANADA, THE BRITISH COLUMBIA CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSOCIATION, THE CANADIAN CONSTITUTION FOUNDATION, CHRISTIAN LEGAL FELLOWSHIP, EVANGELICAL FELLOWSHIP OF CANADA, THE CATHOLIC CIVIL RIGHTS LEAGUE, WORLD SIKH ORGANIZATION OF CANADA, THE JUSTICE CENTRE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL FREEDOMS
  
• 

  SummerAngel

  On a similar but not quite same vein I have wondered whether shunning could and I believe should be viewed as a 'hate crime". I'm thinking where friends and family are shunned purely for no longer believing they are called apostate as a hate term. Given the very low bar for hate crime in UK at the moment. Does anyone know if this has been tried successful or otherwise?. Whilst you can't make someone talk to you it would be the actual doctrine to Disf and the further doctrine to shun that would be challenged