Surrey residents challenging the constitutionality of city bylaw amendments that govern the placement of political signs on private property await a verdict that was reserved after final arguments were heard Wednesday in B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver.

sa国际传媒淚 have no clue when Isa国际传媒檒l get a judgment to you,sa国际传媒� Justice Nigel Kent said after adjourning the case. sa国际传媒淏ut I will in due course, thank you.sa国际传媒�

Lawyer Kevin Smith, representing the plaintiffs, argued that the bylaw as amended on Oct. 18, 2021 presents an unconstitutional infringement on their freedom of expression under Canadasa国际传媒檚 Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

sa国际传媒淭his is not just political disagreement,sa国际传媒� Smith told the judge. sa国际传媒淭his isnsa国际传媒檛 a couple of political adversaries going at it in the normal cut-and-thrust.

sa国际传媒淎ll theysa国际传媒檙e trying to do is make it harder for my clients to participate or to voice their views at all,sa国际传媒� he said of Mayor Doug McCallum and sa国际传媒渉is council supporters.sa国际传媒�

sa国际传媒淭heresa国际传媒檚 nothing normal about that. This suppression of political dissent by the government is exactly what the Charter is supposed to help prevent.sa国际传媒�

The petition was launched by Surrey residents Annie Kaps, Debra (Debi) Johnstone, Colin Pronger, Ivan Scott, Merle Scott and Linda Ypenburg, all members of Keep the RCMP in Surrey. The amended bylaw resulted in them removing related signage from their properties but their petition to the court states they are challenging the amendments to the sign bylaw sa国际传媒渘ot for personal reasons, but in an effort to protect political speech and expression in the City.sa国际传媒�

Smith argued the amendments were sa国际传媒減art of a continuing pattern of behaviour that discloses animus, bias and various steps by the mayor and his supporters to silence the opposition of the petitioners.sa国际传媒�

Matthew Voell, the lawyer representing the City of Surrey, argued the contentious bylaw amendments were driven by city staff recommendations, and sa国际传媒渘ot driven by animus, by council, by the mayor.sa国际传媒�

sa国际传媒淭here was no improper purpose there,sa国际传媒� Voell argued. sa国际传媒淭he petition should be dismissed.

sa国际传媒淭he petitioners appear to want change in the city sa国际传媒� they can effect change at the ballot box.sa国际传媒�

Voell told Kent that the constitutional challenge was brought forward for sa国际传媒減olitical purposessa国际传媒� and sa国际传媒渢his is a manufactured dispute.sa国际传媒�

Meantime, Smith said itsa国际传媒檚 sa国际传媒渃rystal clearsa国际传媒� that no permits sa国际传媒渃an be obtained, I suggest both for the public and the private land signs.sa国际传媒�

sa国际传媒淣o one, not even the councillors, knows what this bylaw says,sa国际传媒� he added. sa国际传媒淭here is considerable confusion, even within the city.sa国际传媒�

tom.zytaruk@surreynowleader.com
Like us on Follow us on   and follow Tom on