Supreme Court rules journalists can protect sources in certain cases

Case involving sponsorship scandal source sent back to Quebec court


In a major victory for journalists, The Supreme Court of Canada has decided that courts must “balance the importance of disclosure to the administration of justice against the public interest in maintaining journalistic source confidentiality.” The decision came after The Globe and Mail‘s Daniel Leblanc appealed an order by a Quebec Superior Court judge that he reveal the sources who tipped him off to the federal sponsorship scandal. Leblanc says he’s confident he will be able to prove to the lower court that there is a “public interest” in keeping the source confidential. Groupe Polygone Editeurs brought the original action against Leblanc, saying they had a right to know the identity of the source code-named “Ma Chouette,” because their business had been damaged as a result of the information. Groupe Polygone was one of the Liberal-friendly advertising firms that earned millions of taxpayer’s dollars from the federal government for work that was never completed.

CBC News

Filed under:

Supreme Court rules journalists can protect sources in certain cases

  1. Sources must absolutely be protected otherwise very valuable information will dry up and many crimes, and other questionable activities will pass under the radar. The source is not the evidence relied upon for conviction or findings of wrong doing. It simply points the public and hopefully the authorities to where the cadavers , bags of money , or whatever are hidden. The authorities still have to investigate and gather probative evidence. If we had better whistle blower protection this would also help.

Sign in to comment.