Freedom of Expression and the Charter: 1982-2022
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2022, on the 40th anniversary of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, I wrote a 5-part blog series that reviewed the Supreme Court of Canada’s s.2(b) jurisprudence. These blogs were published by the Centre for Free Expression (CFE) at Toronto Metropolitan University (TMU), and can be found on the CFE website (See author page: https://cfe.torontomu.ca/blog?issues=All&authors=117). The five blogs, which are consolidated here, begin with a comment on the Court’s 2021 landmark decisions in City of Toronto v. Ontario and Ward v. Quebec. The second blog shifts, providing a quantitative and qualitative survey of the jurisprudence, and is followed by the third blog’s analysis of Irwin Toy and the contextual approach, s.2(b)’s building blocks. The fourth blog addresses newsgathering, open court, and freedom of the press and media, leaving the fifth in the series to comment on s.2(b)’s future. In doing so, the final blog considers the role of positive obligations in the s.2(b) jurisprudence and sketches a proposal for the renewal of s.2(b)’s concepts of breach and jurisprudence.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".