WHAT: BCCLA at Supreme Court of Canada to intervene in Diggs v Nova Scotia Health Authority to argue that habeas corpus must be available to prisoners challenging deprivations of liberty arising from operational or policy decisions that impact all detainees
WHEN: October 13, 2026, at 6:30 am PDT / 9:30 EDT
WHERE: Supreme Court of Canada (Ottawa)
Ottawa, ON / unceded Anishinaabe Algonquin Territory— On October 13, the BC Civil Liberties Association (BCCLA) will intervene at the Supreme Court of Canada’s hearing of Diggs v Nova Scotia Health Authority. The Court will decide whether habeas corpus is available to prisoners’ challenging deprivations of liberty arising from so-called operational or policy decisions that impact all detainees. BCCLA believes that fast and accessible habeas corpus must be available to hold government accountable for how its management of prisons increasingly impacts prisoners’ liberty.
Habeas corpus, or the “great writ of liberty,” is a fast and accessible mechanism that grants prisoners access to court review to ensure that any restrictions imposed on a prisoner’s liberty are in accordance with the rule of law. It’s constitutionally protected by section 10(c) of the Charter and is essential to the section 7 right to liberty and the section 9 right against arbitrary detention.
At trial, the judge found that the applicants, Diggs and Wilband, were deprived of their residual liberty by comparing their experience to that of the “general population inmate” in the normal course of the correctional facility operations. However, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal found that the court had no jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus applications concerning operational or policy-based decisions as this related to “systemic issues”.
BCCLA is intervening to argue that habeas corpus must be available to prisoners because a government should not be able to shield its actions from Charter scrutiny simply by describing its failures as “policy” or “operational”. Section 10(c) of the Charter establishes the right of prisoners to have their detention reviewed for lawfulness through habeas corpus. The Court’s jurisprudence on the inextricably linked section 7 right affirms that operational or policy-based decisions are choices made by state actors and are therefore subject to Charter review. Accordingly, an interpretation of habeas corpus in alignment with section 7 and modern law supports access to habeas corpus for operational and policy decisions.
BCCLA is represented by Frances Mahon of Pender Litigation.
BCCLA’s factum is available here.