What was the decision in Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority v Canadian Federation of Students about political messages?

The decision in Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority v Canadian Federation of Students specifically dealt with the issue of whether a prohibition on political advertising on public property could be justified under Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In this case, the Supreme Court found that while the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (TransLink) had the right to impose certain restrictions on advertising, the specific prohibition on political speech was not justified as a reasonable limit on freedom of expression.

The Court indicated that the restrictions imposed were too broad and did not serve a pressing and substantial objective that would justify limiting the freedom of expression in this context. This aligns with the principles laid out in Section 1 of the Charter, which allows for certain limits on rights and freedoms if they can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society. Essentially, the condition that an infringement of rights must be justified was not met in this case, leading to the conclusion that the infringement of the right to political expression could not be saved under Section 1.

This ruling highlights the importance of protecting freedom of expression, particularly in contexts where political messages are crucial for democratic engagement. The decision illustrates the judiciary's role in ensuring that any restrictions on such fundamental rights are carefully scrutinized, emphasizing the value placed