The Court of Appeal, in turn, rejected the request for anonymity of an administrator of the “Disson nom” (DSN) directory, which since July 2020 has been listing online the identity of the alleged sexual offenders.
Posted at 16:53
Updated at 18:18
The provincial supreme court thus confirmed on Tuesday the sentence of the Higher Court, delivered in February 2021. It also rejected the appeal request against an order for the communication of complaints received by the DSN administrators.
The dispute is opposed to the latter and to Jean-François Marquis, whose name – now withdrawn – was initially on the DSN list. The latter reproaches them in particular for not having taken steps to obtain his version of the facts. For this, he demands $ 50,000 in damages and demands that their identity be revealed during the trial.
“Of course we are satisfied”, exulted the lawyer of Mr. Marchese, MAnd Pierre-Hugues Miller, after reading the sentence. “For us it is a victory all the way through. ”
Former court illustrator Delphine Bergeron is one of two women behind the list. She voluntarily disclosed her identity in September 2020 in a newspaper interview The duty. The second administrator, on the other hand, does not want to be known. He is identified with the acronym AA in the judgments made to date.
However, to remain anonymous, a party must “prove that the disclosure of their identity […] represents a serious risk to his privacy and dignity and not only undermines his private interest, but also poses a serious risk to an important public interest in confidentiality “, reads the decision of judge Geneviève Marcotte, endorsed by judges Manon Savard and Suzanne Gagné. “This is an exceptional step,” the Court emphasizes.
“I find that the plaintiffs […] in this case they have not demonstrated such a threat, “he decides.
The print as well as CBC / Radio-Canada intervened in the file in favor of the disclosure of the identity of A. HA.
“Duty of due diligence”
“AA maintains that her motivation behind the creation of the DSN site and the List is linked to the fact that she was a victim of sexual violence” and that she wishes to “free the voice of the victims”, observes Judge Marcotte. “However, neither this wish, albeit laudable, nor her victim status relieves her of due diligence or exempts her if […] commits a fault that gives rise to responsibility towards the persons reported. ”
It would also be “unfair that the AA applicant could take refuge behind anonymity, added the judge, when she was accused of having initiated a public complaint process against alleged attackers without due diligence and in contempt of their reputation.
“I think it sends a pretty clear message that when you want to do this type of business, you can’t do it anyway, so you have to do it with your face uncovered,” the lady said.And Miller. Neither Delphine Bergeron nor the directors’ attorneys had responded to requests for The print at the time of publication of this text.
Regarding the willingness of the SNB administrators to challenge the reporting order, the Court rejected their arguments, considering in particular the victims protected by the cancellation of their names.
However, the question may be out of date. Mr. Marquis argues that the applicants destroyed the evidence covered by the order, an allegation “impossible to confirm in light of the content of the evidence,” the court said.
M.And Miller does not expect a hearing on the merits of his client’s civil suit until late 2023.
- Number of names on “Dis son nom” “Official List of Alleged Quebec Abusers” as of Tuesday evening. This number has fluctuated a lot since its inception in July 2020.