This page contains messages and stories we have received from lawyers and paralegals who object to this unconstitutional requirement and support Dr. Alford and Lawyer Murray Klippenstein's Charter challenge. If you are a lawyer or paralegal (practicing or non-practicing) and object to the Society's new mandatory Statement of Principles requirement, please write to us at email@example.com to share your own story. We will leave out your name if you wish to remain anonymous.
These statements do not necessarily represent our own reasons for opposing the Statement of Principles requirement.
See below to read (or watch) some of the statements we have already received. You can also find a full playlist of YouTube videos related to this case here.
As a non-white lawyer, I believe it is paramount that we increase diversity in the legal profession and tackle structural barriers for lawyers of colour. However, I also believe we ought to do so in a way that does not significantly encroach upon the rights to free expression or the right to one's belief and opinions. I don't believe that the Statement of Principles achieves the proper balance.
- Kaveh Shahrooz
I am not willing to draft a Statement of Principles. In requiring such a statement the Law Society is engaging in compelled thought and compelled speech and has no right to do so.
- Donald W. Kilpatrick
I am a non-practising lawyer. Why should I have to draft anything at all? They said in the most recent release that it was referring to various laws which apply, but I don't have to do up a declaration to accept I am subject to the law of the land.
The thing is, this requirement will solve nothing even for practising lawyers and firms. Grand statements full of empty buzzwords will be drawn up and flourished, possibly posted in the boardroom, but won't be acted on in any concrete way any more than similar vision and mission statements are. It will not get anyone who is presently unjustly excluded from the profession a job anywhere.
- Timothy Jacques