I learned a new word today, and if words can scare you, this one scared the wits out of me.
The word is SLAPP and it’s an acronym for a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation.
It’s a legal tool used by some lawyers to silence critics and shut down public protest against the actions of their corporate clients. A tool designed to limit our freedom to gather together with other like-minded people to express concerns about the destruction of Nature and risks to human health.
The objective is not necessarily to win the lawsuit, but to intimidate people into silence.
It’s a legal strategy that has been used by Tochal Development’s lawyers to try and silence community members and environmental organizations who have been protesting the destruction of the Lemay Forest. The most recent was the threat of an injunction made against the Manitoba Wilderness Committee (MWC).
MWC had previously reported that the developer had failed to do a tree cavity sweep to determine whether or not pileated woodpeckers were nesting in the Lemay Forest. Those nesting cavities are protected by federal law and must be reported to federal authorities prior to tree felling. If cavities are present, tree cutting in the area can be delayed or limited according to federal regulations.
Rather than asking a federal government employee to explain the law to his client, on January 8th Tochal’s lawyer sent an email to MWC’s Wilderness and Water Campaigner, Eric Reder, who is neither a lawyer nor a federal conservation officer, compelling him to explain federal species protection laws to his client within two hours, or face an injunction.
Prior to that, Lemay protestors were compelled to appear in court when the developer sought an injunction aimed at preventing them from protesting on a street adjacent to the Lemay forest. While the court ruled that protestors could remain, they were warned not to interfere with crews entering the forest to cut down trees.
One of the protestors, Louise May, subsequently wound up back in court to face a contempt charge for allegedly violating that court injunction by blocking one of the developer’s routes into the Lemay Forest. On Feb. 26th 2025 she was found in contempt of a court order for "using her body to prevent the plaintiff from accessing the property” and is now awaiting sentencing.
Other members of the Save the Lemay Coalition have received letters from Tochal’s lawyer ordering them to preserve every piece of correspondence they’ve ever had with elected officials and other stakeholders about efforts to save the forest. This, presumably, in anticipation of legal action by the developer.
The Lemay Forest: John Wintrup, Tochal Developments Winnipeg representative, has said the forest will be destroyed with or without development plan approval by the city.
One city councillor who made an Instagram video went to great lengths to explain that while she supported the protection of the Lemay, she had to be circumspect in what she said, for fear of legal action by the developer.
I myself have a had conversations with my editor about articles I’ve written about the Lemay to ensure that neither he nor I would be subject to a lawsuit by Tochal.
So I ask you – is that what the law was designed to do? To serve the corporate interests of those with deep pockets who can achieve their ends by employing lawyers to intimidate anyone who opposes their actions?
Should the courts not act without fear or favour to defend freedom of speech and freedom of assembly? Isn’t one of the fundamental principles of common law to protect human rights, or is it really only concerned with the protection of corporate property rights?
Given the way western democracies are responding to the peaceful protests of environmentalists and climate activists around the globe, I’d be tempted to say that when it comes to our much vaunted legal system, corporate and private property rights trump all.
In just 5 years, 7000 peaceful climate protestors have been arrested in the UK.
Just take a look at Britain, the birthplace of our common law system. According to research conducted at Bristol University, the UK is now a world leader in the legal crackdown on peaceful environmental and climate protestors and, like other western countries, recently passed anti-protests laws which threaten non-violent protestors with sentences of up to ten years.
Similar tactics have also been attempted in Canada with the arrest of Indigenous land defenders on a host of charges from subversion to criminal contempt of a court injunction.
All of which spells, to me at least, an assault on basic human rights that threatens all of us.
As a UN special appointee on human rights explained it to reporters at The Guardian, “These are people we should be protecting but are seen by governments and corporations as a threat to be neutralised…”
And in some countries “neutralizing” environmental protestors can spell death. Around the world, between 2012 and 2022, close to 2000 environmentalists were murdered.
So, while it would be absurd to imagine anyone getting killed in the campaign to save the Lemay forest, the indigenous land defenders and concerned community members protesting to save this ecologically sensitive and historically significant land have faced an ongoing legal campaign designed to frighten and silence them.
Legal perhaps, but just? I don’t think so. And I can only hope that our legislators and the courts eventually come to the same conclusion.
Read more about The Coalition to Save the Lemay Forest here: https://savelemayforest.ca/
To contribute to their work and legal fund go to: https://www.gofundme.com/f/save-lemay-forest-from-destruction-and-development
コメント