This is a draft prepared by one contributor, published for public discussion. Nothing here is an adopted position of the project or a proposal it endorses. The purpose is to learn where Albertans agree, disagree, and want changes.
Freedom of Digital Expression
Alberta aloneContested
Alberta can adopt this now under its own authority (Constitution Act, 1982, s.45). However, this classification is contested; the provision may face a Charter challenge or other legal obstacle.
Current Law
Section 2(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects freedom of expression, including online expression. Restrictions on online expression are subject to Charter s.1 analysis. Federal jurisdiction over broadcasting and telecommunications is in Constitution Act, 1867 s.91, exercised through the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission.
Proposed
All persons have the right1 to access, create, receive, and share information through any digital or electronic means, including the internet, without interference or prior restraint.
No law or regulation shall restrict online expression unless such restriction serves a compelling and demonstrable public interest of the highest order, is narrowly and precisely defined in law, is demonstrably necessary and proportionate in a free and democratic society, and affords full due process and opportunity for judicial review.
Legal accuracy note1Scope within provincial jurisdiction. The section as drafted protects digital expression against any law or regulation that restricts it without meeting a compelling-interest test. Provincial jurisdiction over expression extends to defamation, civil remedies, education, and provincial regulation. Telecommunications carriers and broadcasters are federally regulated under the Telecommunications Act, S.C. 1993, c. 38, and the Broadcasting Act, S.C. 1991, c. 11; provincial protection cannot displace federal regulation of those carriers.
Protection from Digital Surveillance
What Alberta can do now
Alberta can bind its own agencies (provincial police, ASIRT, the AER, municipal police, provincial contractors) to the individualized-warrant standard and the ban on bulk surveillance. Alberta's Personal Information Protection Act already governs private-sector data handling. What Alberta cannot do is bind federal agencies (RCMP acting in federal matters, CSIS, CSE) or override federally authorized warrants.
Current Law
Search and seizure protections under s.8 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms apply to digital data (R. v. Spencer, 2014 SCC 43; R. v. Marakah, 2017 SCC 59). Production orders, wiretaps, and surveillance authorisations are governed by Parts VI and XV of the Criminal Code and by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-23. Alberta's Personal Information Protection Act governs provincial-sector and private-sector data handling within the province.
Proposed
Every individual has the right to digital privacy, including the privacy of their personal data, communications, metadata, browsing activity, and online associations.
No governmental body, agent, or contractor shall access, monitor, collect, retain, or analyze digital communications1 or data of any person except pursuant to a specific and individualized judicial warrant issued upon probable cause, and for the limited purposes explicitly authorized by that warrant.
The bulk collection, dragnet surveillance, or algorithmic monitoring of online speech or metadata without individualized suspicion is prohibited.
Classification note1Full realization requires federal cooperation. The clause as drafted prohibits 'any governmental body, agent, or contractor' from accessing digital communications without individualized warrants. That language reaches federal agencies (RCMP, CSIS, CSE) exercising surveillance authorities under the Criminal Code (Parts VI and XV), the CSIS Act, and the National Defence Act, all of which are within exclusive federal jurisdiction. The clause is enforceable against Alberta agencies and private actors regulated by the province under s.45; it cannot bind federal agencies or override federal warrants. Full realization of the prohibition as written would require either federal legislative cooperation, a successful Charter s.8 challenge to federal surveillance powers, or a constitutional amendment under Part V. Federal warrant practice is reviewed under Charter s.8, not under provincial constitutional text.
Limits on Delegated Censorship
Alberta alone
Alberta can adopt this now under its own authority (Constitution Act, 1982, s.45).
Current Law
Government compulsion of private actors to remove lawful content engages Charter s.2(b) and is subject to s.1 justification. The Online Streaming Act (Bill C-11), S.C. 2023, c. 8, and the Online News Act, S.C. 2023, c. 23, are federal statutes affecting online content.
Proposed
No government authority shall compel any private entity, platform, service provider, or intermediary to suppress, remove, demote, or otherwise restrict the availability of lawful content without clear and specific statutory authority, written notice to the affected individual or party, and a meaningful and timely opportunity to appeal or obtain judicial review.
No private actor shall be deputized to act as a censor or enforcement agent of government speech regulation without full public transparency and independent oversight.
Transparency and Oversight
Alberta alone
Alberta can adopt this now under its own authority (Constitution Act, 1982, s.45).
Current Law
Alberta has an Information and Privacy Commissioner under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, R.S.A. 2000, c. F-25, and the Personal Information Protection Act, S.A. 2003, c. P-6.5. There is no dedicated digital-rights oversight body.
Proposed
All governmental requests or directives to moderate digital content, collect user data, or access digital systems must be recorded and published in annual transparency reports, except where such publication would pose an imminent and specific risk to national security, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction.
An independent Digital Rights Oversight Commission, appointed by the Legislature, shall be established to review government use of digital surveillance powers, audit content moderation requests or directives involving public authorities, and investigate and report on alleged violations of this Article.
Enforcement and Remedies
Alberta alone
Alberta can adopt this now under its own authority (Constitution Act, 1982, s.45).
Current Law
Charter remedies are available under ss.24(1) and 24(2). Alberta law provides civil remedies under the Personal Information Protection Act and through tort actions including intrusion upon seclusion (Jones v. Tsige, 2012 ONCA 32, recognised in Alberta jurisprudence).
Proposed
Any individual whose rights under this Article are infringed shall have standing to bring a claim for declaratory, injunctive, or monetary relief.
The Legislature shall ensure that adequate remedies and accessible legal procedures exist to uphold these protections, including funding for independent legal counsel when necessary.
Freedom of expression online, with narrow and proportionate restrictions only
Digital privacy and a ban on bulk or algorithmic surveillance without individualized suspicion
Limits on government compelling private platforms to suppress lawful content
Annual transparency reports and a Digital Rights Oversight Commission
Standing to sue for declaratory, injunctive, and monetary relief
Why this article is proposed
Most of the rights in this article exist somewhere in Canadian law, but they are scattered across the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, federal statutes (the Criminal Code, the CSIS Act, the Privacy Act, PIPEDA), and provincial statutes (Alberta's Personal Information Protection Act). The article would gather them into a single provincial framework and entrench them so they cannot be reduced by ordinary legislation.
What it would change
Section 1 entrenches a high threshold (compelling and demonstrable public interest, narrowly tailored, proportionate, with judicial review) for any restriction on online expression. Section 2 bans bulk and algorithmic surveillance without individualized suspicion. Section 3 limits the government's ability to enlist private platforms to suppress lawful content. Section 4 requires annual transparency reports and creates a Digital Rights Oversight Commission. Section 5 creates civil remedies.
The legal basis
These rules sit on Charter foundations (s.2(b), s.8) and on provincial jurisdiction over property and civil rights in the province (Constitution Act, 1867 s.92(13)). Provincial entrenchment is allowed under Constitution Act, 1982 s.45. The article cannot bind federal surveillance, federal broadcasting and telecommunications regulation, or federal content laws, all of which remain under Parliament's authority.
Open questions
Two questions for Albertans: whether the high threshold for restricting online expression is workable in practice given that some restrictions (defamation, intimate-image abuse, child-safety rules) are already in force; and how to draw the line between protecting Albertans from federal surveillance overreach and respecting the lawful exercise of federal investigative authority under judicial warrant.
Revision 12026-05-20
major
Initial draft of Article IX from the v2 draft constitution, with per-section classification, current-law context, and editorial notes.