The Edmonton Institution for Women, one of six women’s corrections facilities in Canada (Photo credit: The Canadian Press/Jason Franson)

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that a lawsuit has been launched against the Federal Government, seeking an end to the practice of forcibly confining female inmates of federal prisons with trans-identifying male inmates. The lawsuit claims that this practice is cruel and unusual punishment and violates the Charter rights of female inmates, including “their right to be protected from mental, physical, and sexual abuse…”

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the national and non-partisan organization Canadian Women’s Sex-Based Rights (CAWSBAR) with the Federal Court of Canada in Toronto on April 7, 2025.

Since 2019, CAWSBAR has advocated for a Canada “where women and girls can be assured that their sex-based rights to bodily privacy ,dignity, fairness, and security are upheld both in law and in public policy.”

Their lawsuit takes aim at the Correctional Service Canada’s Commissioner’s Directive 100: Gender Diverse Offenders, which permits the practice of transferring trans-identifying male inmates to any of six women’s prisons across Canada. CAWSBAR is asking the Federal Court to declare that this Directive is of no force or effect.

Their lawsuit references an extensive list of physical and psychological harms female inmates have suffered as a result of being forcibly confined with trans-identifying male prisoners, including sexual assaults, sexual harassment, beatings, stalking, and grooming.

Many female prisoners come from disadvantaged backgrounds that often include past physical and sexual abuse from males. The current practice of having both males and females attend the same group therapy sessions makes it difficult for female inmates to fully participate in the treatment they seek. In advancing CASWBAR’s claim, lawyers will provide the court with evidence of psychological and physical harms that often lead to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, flashbacks of stressful violent and/or emotionally disturbing events involving men, anxiety, anger, depression, hopelessness, and suicidality.

Female inmates are reluctant to complain about these arrangements. The court document states that complaints “are often viewed by correctional officers and staff as harassment, intolerance, and/or ‘transphobia.’ Female inmates do not speak out for fear of an entry on their institutional record, which will eventually be considered by the Parole Board of Canada, and which could impact the decision to grant or not grant parole.”

CAWSBAR is not the first organization to report on the risks associated with forcibly confining female inmates alongside trans-identifying males. According to 2023 research from the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, “More than 90% (55 of 61) of [trans-identified male] prisoners were incarcerated for violent offences. Of the group, nearly half (25) had a most serious offence that was homicide related and a third (18) had a most serious offense that was sexual in nature. In comparison, fewer than three-in-10 (6 of 21) [trans-identified females] were convicted of homicide related offences. This proportion of [trans-identified males] incarcerated for sexual and homicide-related offences is extraordinarily high compared to the general female prison population.”

Prior to 2017, only males who had completed sex reassignment surgery could be transferred to a women’s prison.

In October 2016, however, Parliament passed Bill-16, which amended the Canadian Human Rights Act to include gender identity and gender expression as prohibited grounds of discrimination. The Corrections and Conditional Release Act was also amended to include gender identity and expression as prohibited grounds of discrimination. Bill-16 became law on June 19, 2017, and Correctional Service Canada responded by drafting policies that authorized the transfer into women’s prisons of males who identify as women but have not necessarily undergone any surgical transitions.

The current policy, Commissioner’s directive 100: Gender diverse offenders, came into effect in May 2022.

CAWSBAR’s lawsuit argues that the current practice violates the constitutionally protected rights of female inmates. Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees female inmates the right to life, liberty, and security of the person. Section 12 guarantees the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment. Section 15 guarantees equality before and under the law as well as the right not to be discriminated against on the basis of sex.

Their lawsuit also references section 28, which reads, “Notwithstanding anything in this Charter, the rights and freedoms referred to in it are guaranteed equally to male and female persons.”

Heather Mason is a CAWSBAR board member and former inmate at the Grand Valley Institution for Women in Kitchener, Ontario. She explained the reason for her organization’s involvement and her personal motivation. “We initiated this action,” she stated, “to highlight the federal government’s failure to protect women and to raise public awareness about the cruel and unusual punishment that incarcerated women endure as a result of this transfer policy,” she says.

“This matter is especially important to me as a former federal prisoner,” Ms. Mason continued, “I firmly believe that all women are entitled to sex-based rights and protections as specified in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

John Carpay, President of the Justice Centre, stated, “This lawsuit is a pivotal stand for the safety and dignity of female inmates, challenging a policy that disregards their Charter-protected rights and exposes them to intolerable harm. It underscores the urgent need to prioritize the security of vulnerable women over ideological directives.”

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

Democracy Watch asked that an independent prosecutor be appointed to look over evidence it provided to get permission to carry out a private prosecution of Trudeau’s role in the SNC-Lavalin affair.

One of Canada’s most well-respected democratic watchdog groups says the Ontario government should organize for an impartial prosecutor to investigate former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s involvement in the SNC-Lavalin affair.  

In a letter dated March 21 written to Ontario’s Attorney General Doug Downey, watchdog Democracy Watch asked directly that an independent prosecutor be appointed to look over evidence from its recent Ontario Court of Justice application to get approval to go ahead with a private prosecution of Trudeau’s role in the 2019 scandal. 

“The RCMP (Royal Canadian Mounted Police) did a very superficial investigation into the Trudeau Cabinet’s obstruction of the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin,” wrote lawyer Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, on behalf of the group’s board of directors.

Conacher noted that the RCMP “didn’t even interview many witnesses or try to obtain key secret Cabinet communication records, and buried the investigation with an almost two-year delay, and then made a behind-closed-doors, very questionable decision not to prosecute anyone.” 

SNC-Lavalin, which now goes by the name “AtkinsRéalis,” in 2019 pleaded guilty to fraud in a Québec Provincial Court and was hit with a $280 million fine. Company executives also admitted that they had paid $47.7 million in bribes to get contracts in Libya. 

In October 2023, Canadian Liberal MPs on the ethics committee voted to stop the RCMP from testifying about the SNC-Lavalin bribery scandal. 

In June 2023, LifeSiteNews reported that the RCMP denied it was looking into whether Trudeau and his cabinet committed obstruction of justice concerning the SNC-Lavalin bribery scandal. 

In its letter, Democracy Watch called up Downey to strike a committee comprised of persons without political party ties to choose an impartial lawyer to be an Independent Special Prosecutor. This prosecutor would review all the evidence and then make a public decision about Trudeau’s involvement in the affair.  

“The RCMP lacks independence from the Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers who handpick the RCMP Commissioner and deputy commissioners and division heads through a secretive process, and they all serve at the pleasure of the Cabinet so they are vulnerable to political interference, which is likely part of the reason the RCMP rolled over and let Trudeau off,” noted Conacher.

“The Attorney General is also a tainted by partisanship as he is from Ontario’s ruling party and so, to ensure integrity and impartiality, a fully independent special prosecutor needs to be appointed to review the evidence concerning whether the prosecution of Trudeau should proceed.” 

Conacher also stated that a public inquiry was needed to see why the RCMP “tried to cover up its investigation” and chose not to prosecute.  

Retired judge also says Trudeau should be prosecuted  

SNC-Lavalin was faced with charges of corruption and fraud concerning about $48 million in payments made to Libyan government officials between 2001 and 2011. The company had hoped to be spared a trial and have its prosecution deferred.

However, in 2019, then-Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould did not go along with the request and contended that both Trudeau and his top Liberal officials had inappropriately applied pressure on her for four months to directly intervene in the criminal prosecution of the group.

Jen Danch of Swadron Associates law firm will be representing Democracy Watch for its application, with Wayne Crookes, founder of Integrity B.C., being a key supporter of it.  

Of interesting note is that the application includes an opinion from an unnamed retired superior court justice who also supports the prosecution effort.  

“There are reasonable and probable grounds to believe that the Prime Minister committed the offence of Obstruction of Justice under s. 139(2) of the Criminal Code and possibly the offence of Breach of Trust by a Public Official under s. 122 of the Criminal Code,” wrote the judge. 

“The facts outlined by the Ethics Commissioner and the evidence of Ms. Wilson-Raybould at the House Committee on Justice indicate that the Prime Minister and his staff set out to interfere in the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin by trying to stop the prosecution and replace an apparently properly founded prosecution with a less onerous process that would avoid the consequences of a conviction for SNC-Lavalin.”  

At this time, there will be a hearing in Ottawa on March 28 where a judge will decide procedural processes regarding how or if the prosecution will be allowed to continue.  

Last year, the RCMP confirmed it never talked with Trudeau or was able to view secret cabinet records before declining to levy charges.

As for the initial investigation concerning SNC-Lavalin, Wilson-Raybould testified in early 2019 to Canada’s justice committee that she believed she was moved from her justice cabinet posting to veterans’ affairs due to the fact she did not grant a request from SNC-Lavalin for a deferred prosecution agreement rather than a criminal trial. 

Of note is that a criminal conviction would have banned the company from landing any government contracts for 10 years. 

Trudeau flat-out denied it was being investigated by the RCMP. 

Less than four years ago, Trudeau was found to have broken the federal ethics laws, or Section 9 of the Conflict of Interest Act, for his role in pressuring Wilson-Raybould.