Canada’s different classes of citizens
Leaders on the Frontier: In a thought-provoking interview, host David Leis engages with constitutional law expert Bruce Pardy on the pressing question: Is Canada truly upholding the rule of law in 2026, particularly in light of recent events that challenge the very foundation of free speech. A professor of law at Queen’s University, Prof. Pardy introduces a crucial distinction between “rule of law” and “rule by law,” arguing that while Canada is flooded with laws, they are increasingly wielded as tools by those in power rather than serving the public good.
Government officials—politicians, bureaucrats, and judges—often prioritize managing situations over adhering to legal principles, says Prof. Pardy, which has led to a system where decisions are made on the fly rather than through established laws. This shift, he suggests, undermines the very foundation of justice and equality that Canadians hold dear, and portends dire consequences for society.
Key Topics Covered:
The Barry Neufeld case — A former Chilliwack, B.C. school trustee fined $750,000 by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal in early 2026 for social media posts criticizing gender ideology/SOGI (Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity) curriculum, deemed discriminatory and hate speech against LGBTQ+ teachers. Prof. Pardy highlights this as an example of the chilling effect on free speech, arguing that federal and provincial Human Rights Codes can undermine Charter protections and punish opinions, regardless of their validity. This even prompted comedian John Cleese to avoid performing in B.C. due to fear of legal repercussions for his material.
Free speech erosion — Broader concerns that Canadian human rights laws (e.g., B.C. and Ontario codes) prohibit certain speech, create exceptions for “special programs” favoring specific groups, and shift the Charter from negative rights (government non-interference) to positive obligations, diluting original freedoms.
Gladue principle — In sentencing, courts consider the backgrounds and hardships of Indigenous offenders, which creates a tension between punishment fitting the crime vs. the criminal. Prof. Pardy sees this as unequal treatment, undermining equality before the law.
Equality and DEI critiques — Policies prioritizing identity/group equity over merit/individual rights (e.g., in admissions, sentencing, or programs) foster inequality, victimhood culture, separate classes of citizens, and ideological bias (described as neo-Marxist, inverting power structures). Examples include Supreme Court cases on pensions and exceptions allowing affirmative action for some groups but not others.
Broader implications — Ideological capture of law/institutions stifles dissent, promotes self-censorship, prioritizes feelings over reason (anti-Enlightenment), erodes trust in justice, and risks totalitarianism by enforcing mandatory beliefs. Prof. Pardy calls for reclaiming reason, personal responsibility, true equality (not contingent on identity), and free expression to preserve Canadian society.
Contact us to book Bruce Pardy for an interview or appearance, or to subscribe to our newsletter: rightsprobe@protonmail.com.
