Ryan Alford v. Canada (Attorney General) (Day 1/2) (41336) episode artwork

EPISODE · Nov 15, 2025 · 1H 50M

Ryan Alford v. Canada (Attorney General) (Day 1/2) (41336)

from Supreme Court of Canada Hearings (Floor Audio) · host SCC Hearings Podcast

The National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act (the “Act”) creates a committee of Parliamentarians (the “Committee”) appointed by the Governor-in-Council who are given the authority to access classified information pertaining to matters of national security and intelligence. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of preparing reports for the Prime Minister on the matters it inquires into.Where a proceeding is brought against a Committee member, based on the alleged improper disclosure of information obtained as a consequence of membership on the Committee, s. 12 of the Act expressly excludes any claim for parliamentary immunity. Statements made in Parliament or in a committee of Parliament can be the subject of a charge under the Act, or related statutory provisions, and statements made by Committee members in Parliament or in committee are admissible against the member to prove the alleged improper disclosure.Appellant Ryan Alford, a law professor, sought and was granted public interest standing to bring a challenge to the constitutionality of s. 12. He brought an application seeking a declaration that s. 12 was ultra vires Parliament. A judge of Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice granted the application and declared s. 12 ultra vires the Parliament of Canada and constitutionally invalid. The Court of Appeal for Ontario unanimously allowed Canada’s appeal. Argued Date 2025-11-05 Keywords Constitutional law — Canadian institutions — Parliament — Parliamentary privilege — National security — Parliament enacting legislation authorizing committee of parliamentarians to access classified information pertaining to matters of national security and intelligence — Legislation prohibiting committee members from disclosing protected information and eliminating immunity claims based on parliamentary privilege in proceedings arising from disclosure — Whether s. 12 of National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act ultra vires Parliament’s power to enact legislation defining parliamentary privileges – Whether s. 12 abrogating privilege that is part of Constitution of Canada under s. 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which states that amendments to Constitution can only be made in accordance with Constitution’s own exclusive and explicit provisions for amendment — National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, S.C. 2017, c. 15, s. 12 — Constitution Act, 1867, s. 18 — Constitution Act, 1982, s. 52. Notes (Ontario) (Civil) (By Leave) Language Floor Audio Disclaimers This podcast is created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. The original version of this hearing may be found on the Supreme Court of Canada's website. The above case summary was prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).

The National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act (the “Act”) creates a committee of Parliamentarians (the “Committee”) appointed by the Governor-in-Council who are given the authority to access classified information pertaining to matters of national security and intelligence. The Committee is charged with the responsibility of preparing reports for the Prime Minister on the matters it inquires into.Where a proceeding is brought against a Committee member, based on the alleged improper disclosure of information obtained as a consequence of membership on the Committee, s. 12 of the Act expressly excludes any claim for parliamentary immunity. Statements made in Parliament or in a committee of Parliament can be the subject of a charge under the Act, or related statutory provisions, and statements made by Committee members in Parliament or in committee are admissible against the member to prove the alleged improper disclosure.Appellant Ryan Alford, a law professor, sought and was granted public interest standing to bring a challenge to the constitutionality of s. 12. He brought an application seeking a declaration that s. 12 was ultra vires Parliament. A judge of Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice granted the application and declared s. 12 ultra vires the Parliament of Canada and constitutionally invalid. The Court of Appeal for Ontario unanimously allowed Canada’s appeal. Argued Date 2025-11-05 Keywords Constitutional law — Canadian institutions — Parliament — Parliamentary privilege — National security — Parliament enacting legislation authorizing committee of parliamentarians to access classified information pertaining to matters of national security and intelligence — Legislation prohibiting committee members from disclosing protected information and eliminating immunity claims based on parliamentary privilege in proceedings arising from disclosure — Whether s. 12 of National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act ultra vires Parliament’s power to enact legislation defining parliamentary privileges – Whether s. 12 abrogating privilege that is part of Constitution of Canada under s. 52 of the Constitution Act, 1982, which states that amendments to Constitution can only be made in accordance with Constitution’s own exclusive and explicit provisions for amendment — National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, S.C. 2017, c. 15, s. 12 — Constitution Act, 1867, s. 18 — Constitution Act, 1982, s. 52. Notes (Ontario) (Civil) (By Leave) Language Floor Audio Disclaimers This podcast is created as a public service to promote public access and awareness of the workings of Canada's highest court. It is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Court. The original version of this hearing may be found on the Supreme Court of Canada's website. The above case summary was prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch).

NOW PLAYING

Ryan Alford v. Canada (Attorney General) (Day 1/2) (41336)

0:00 1:50:21

No transcript for this episode yet

We transcribe on demand. Request one and we'll notify you when it's ready — usually under 10 minutes.

Ask A Spaceman Archives - 365 Days of Astronomy Ask A Spaceman Archives - 365 Days of Astronomy Podcasting Astronomy Every Day of the Year Eat to Live Jenna Fuhrman, Dr. Fuhrman Our health is our most precious gift and smart nutrition can change your life. Each month, join Dr. Fuhrman and his daughter, Jenna Fuhrman as they discuss important topics in the world of nutrition. Eat to Live will change the way you eat and think about food. French Your Way Jessica: Native French teacher founder of French Your Way Boost your French listening skills and test your comprehension with this one of a kind series of podcasts. Get the chance to listen to a real conversation between native speakers talking at normal speed AND customise your learning experience through carefully designed sets of questions (2 levels of difficulty) available for download at www.frenchvoicespodcast.com. All interviews also come with the transcript. French teacher Jessica interviews native speakers of French from around the world who share a bit of their life and passion. Where else would you meet in one same place a French yoga teacher based in Melbourne, a soap manufacturer from Provence, or a couple cycling around the world? That Hoarder: Overcome Compulsive Hoarding That Hoarder Hoarding disorder is stigmatised and people who hoard feel vast amounts of shame. This podcast began life as an audio diary, an anonymous outlet for somebody with this weird condition. That Hoarder speaks about her experiences living with compulsive hoarding, she interviews therapists, academics, researchers, children of hoarders, professional organisers and influencers, and she shares insight and tips for others with the problem. Listened to by people who hoard as well as those who love them and those who work with them, Overcome Compulsive Hoarding with That Hoarder aims to shatter the stigma, share the truth and speak openly and honestly to improve lives.

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is this episode of Supreme Court of Canada Hearings (Floor Audio)?

This episode is 1 hour and 50 minutes long.

When was this Supreme Court of Canada Hearings (Floor Audio) episode published?

This episode was published on November 15, 2025.

What is this episode about?

The National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act (the “Act”) creates a committee of Parliamentarians (the “Committee”) appointed by the Governor-in-Council who are given the authority to access classified information...

Can I download this Supreme Court of Canada Hearings (Floor Audio) episode?

Yes, you can download this episode by clicking the download button on the episode player, or subscribe to the podcast in your preferred podcast app for automatic downloads.
URL copied to clipboard!