McGill asks judge to order 'occupants' off its campus, end encampment protest

A Quebec Superior Court judge on Monday questioned lawyers representing McGill University about the need for urgency in their request for an injunction to take down a pro-Palestinian encampment on the school's downtown campus. 

Jacques Darche, a lawyer representing McGill, argued in court that the university had a right to use its private property and repeatedly referred to student activists as "occupants," saying they were breaking university policy and preventing upcoming convocation ceremonies. 

He referred to the encampment as a "fortress," a "village" and "fortifications."

But Darche faced sharp questions from Superior Court Justice Marc St-Pierre, who said the lawyer needed to display evidence of an urgent need for the encampment to come down. 

St-Pierre said he "needs urgency" to grant a provisional injunction, "not just a clear right" for McGill to use its land.

Darche appeared increasingly frustrated by the questions and repeated his assertion that McGill, as the land owner, had the right to use the land on which the protesters were camping, but the argument did not appear to sway St-Pierre.

In court documents, McGill said the encampment was set up on its private property without prior warning, poses a "security, safety and public health risk" and has escalated tensions on campus.

The university said it does not want to limit the right to protest, but said the encampment "differs significantly from the typical protest experienced at McGill," calling it a "fortified and entrenched space."

McGill cited "fierce verbal exchanges" between protesters and counter-protesters, possible fire code breaches, and the presence of barrels of what could be "human waste." 

Max Silverman, a lawyer representing Independent Jewish Voices, one of the groups targeted by the injunction request, said the debate in court was more complicated than expected. 

He said St-Pierre's judgment, expected sometime Tuesday, could set a precedent for this type of protest in the country.

Silverman pointed out that the judge questioned whether the right to protest in Canada included occupying a space as a protected form of that freedom of expression.

Silverman pointed out that the judge questioned whether occupying a space was a form of freedom of expression protected under the right to protest in Canada.

The limit on freedom of expression is when that right interferes with the right of somebody else, Silverman noted, saying he argued that the encampment did not interfere with the university's property rights.