Report calls for transparency and ideological balance in federally funded legal battles
The federal Court Challenges Program, which helps fund legal battles related to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is once again facing criticism over transparency and claims of ideological bias in its funding choices.
A recent report by Dave Snow, an associate professor of political science at the University of Guelph, and Ryan Alford, a law professor at Lakehead University’s Bora Laskin faculty of law, published by the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, examined the program’s annual reports from 2018 to 2024. It found that 96 per cent of funded human rights cases supported progressive causes, with no funding identified for conservative rights claims. The program distributes between $3 million and $5 million annually to support important test cases, offering up to $200,000 per case, $50,000 for legal interventions, and $20,000 for case development.
 Critics argue the Court Challenges Program lacks transparency in its funding, favouring equality and human rights causes over conservative claims |
| Recommended |
| Why Human Rights Commissions need a new name and focus
|
| How Canadians lost the rule of law
|
| Any violation of human rights is a crime against humanity
|
 Dave Snow |
 Ryan Alford |
Since 2018, the program has funded 345 of 664 applications, including 216 human rights cases and 129 language rights cases. Of the 22 language rights cases highlighted, 64 per cent challenged provincial policies. The human rights panel primarily supported Section 15 (equality rights) cases, with 85 per cent involving equality rights claims. Notable cases included expanding the Disability Tax Credit, increasing employment insurance access for parents returning from leave, and reducing Canada Pension Plan qualification periods.
Critics highlight cases like Seklani v. Canada, which challenged refugee claim denials for migrants transiting through the United States, and Canada v. Power, where the Supreme Court allowed compensation claims for unconstitutional laws. Another case, Tapambwa v. Canada, involved individuals accused of crimes against humanity seeking refugee protection.
The program, run by the University of Ottawa Official Languages and Bilingualism Institute and guided by expert panels focused on equality rights, multiculturalism and language protections, has been criticized for withholding funding recipient details under litigation privilege, raising broader transparency concerns.
The report also said that 31 per cent of the 26 human rights cases highlighted by the program aimed to expand government funding or services, such as health care for irregular migrants or increased benefits for First Nations. It also pointed out that the program funded interventions in the Supreme Court case that upheld the federal carbon tax without revealing which groups received funding.
First established in 1978 by Pierre Trudeau, the program has been repeatedly cancelled and revived by various governments. A 2021 bill, Bill C-316, aimed at making the program permanent, died in 2025 when Parliament was prorogued.
The report revealed that $4.2 million of the program’s $6.2 million budget was spent, with $1.17 million going to administration. It listed 59 concluded cases between 2018 and 2024, including challenges to federal refugee policies, disability rights and Indigenous governance issues. It also highlighted funding for legal challenges to campaign finance restrictions and support for Indigenous family services legislation.
Supporters say the program provides access to justice for marginalized groups and helps clarify constitutional rights. Critics argue that its funding decisions reflect a progressive bias, hurting its credibility. Analysts like Ian Brodie, a professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Calgary, believe the program mainly serves equality-seeking groups on the left, while others worry its influence on provincial policies undermines Canadian federalism.
The program’s funding has drawn scrutiny, with critics questioning the use of taxpayer dollars for legal challenges against government policies, especially when funding recipients aren’t disclosed. As calls for reform grow louder, some suggest expanding the program to include conservative claims, while others advocate for its abolition, citing concerns over judicial independence and political influence.
The report concludes that the Court Challenges Program has a clear progressive bias, with most funding supporting expanded government roles and activist interpretations of the Charter. It calls for more transparency and broader ideological representation in funding decisions.
| News Desk
Explore more on Human rights, Rights and Responsibilities
The views, opinions, and positions expressed by our columnists and contributors are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of our publication.
Troy Media is dedicated to empowering Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in fostering an informed and engaged public by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections, enriches national conversations, and helps Canadians better understand one another.
