The lawyer representing an Alberta separatist group says a decision made to quash a separation petition in court featured “numerous errors in law” and is “anti-democratic.”
Speaking to CTV News Channel on Wednesday afternoon, Alberta Independence Petition Project lawyer Jeffrey Rath said Justice Shaina Leonard’s Wednesday decision to strike down Stay Free Alberta’s separation petition featured “numerous errors in law throughout” and “breaches of the rules of natural justice.”
That petition received more than 300,000 signatures and was submitted to Elections Alberta officials for verification last week.
Lawyers for several First Nations argued last month that the province’s referendum process and its use by separatists are unconstitutional, as the process didn’t require Indigenous consultation. They added separation would violate treaty rights.
In her decision, Leonard said that there was a “duty to consult” First Nations and “as a matter of logic and common sense, there can be no doubt that Alberta’s secession from Canada will have an impact on Treaties 7 and 8.”
She added a bill passed by Premier Danielle Smith’s government in December to amend the citizen-initiated referendum process “put in motion a series of required steps that engaged the duty to consult.”
“No consultation occurred. Alberta breached its duty to consult with the applicants,” Leonard wrote.
She added Alberta’s chief electoral officer never should have issued the referendum petition.
Supporters fly flags in support of Mitch Sylvestre as he submits his signatures for a separation referendum to Elections Alberta in Edmonton, on Monday, May 4, 2026. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson
But Rath says he sees it differently.
“There’s no articulation in this decision how it is that putting down signatures on a petition and then having these signatures counted … for consideration offends any treaty right,” Rath said.
When asked if Stay Free Alberta had consulted First Nations groups ahead of launching the petition, Rath said the law didn’t require consultation until voters delivered a “yes” vote in a referendum itself.
“The law requires consultation in the context of amendments to the Canadian constitution that involves the devolution of federal power to the provinces that affects First Nations,” Rath said.
“From our perspective no rules were broken,” Rath said.
He added his group would be moving forward to appeal the decision.
Source: