You are on page 1of 3


September 29, 2014

C . Katie Black
CazaSaikaley srl/LLP
350 - 220 Laurier Avenue West
Ottawa, ON K1P 5Z9
Alexander G olovko
C/O Student Experience Office, Carleton University
Tory Building, Room 430
1125 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6
C arleton U niversity Students Association, Inc.
University Centre, Room 401
1125 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, ON K1S 5B6
RE: Cease and Desist Letter of September 11, 2014 to Mathieu Murphy-Perron et al.
Dear All:
It has come to our attention that the Cease and Desist Letter issued by Ms. Black on September
11, 2014 contains an incorrect and counterfactual interpretation of events, and we believe that this
letter represents an attempt to silence fair comment criticism of the actions and legacy of various
iterations of the Carleton University Students Association (CUSA) executive, collectively
represented by the slate name and branding A Better Carleton (ABC). The current slate of
executives represents the third iteration of this slate name and branding, having been first used by
Alexander Golovko and others for the 2012-2013 academic year. Further, we object to the
characterization of the published material by Mr. Murphy-Perron as absolutely false, defamatory,
factually baseless[,] and designed to destroy [CazaSaikaleys] clients impeccable reputation and
cause harm to their families. Through this letter, we will outline the factual errors, and draw from
both published reports that confirm the events as published by Mr. Murphy-Perron and our own
experiences with CUSA. While we may not necessarily agree with the opinions expressed by Mr.
Murphy-Perron, we absolutely believe they represent fair comment.
As you are aware, the Cease and Desist Letter makes reference to five (5) particular statements
that it deems objectionable. We will address three (3) statements individually, and two (2) together

In 2009, Rebecca Granovsky-Larsen, then-Editor-in-Chief, and Nora Loreto, then-News Editor, of
the Ryerson Free Press published an article documenting a recent Conservative Party student
workshop at the University of Waterloo expose a partisan attempt to take over student unions and
undermine Ontario Public Interest Research Groups (OPIRGs) on campuses across Ontario.
unions-exposed/) Mr. Golovko, in his tenure as CUSA President, proceeded to target progressive
student organizations on campus, from the funding Ontario Public Interest Research Group
(OPIRG) Carleton and the Carleton Food Collective (source:
withholds-opirg-and-carleton-food-collective-levies/), to the resources provided by the Canadian
Federation of Students (CFS) and Graduate Students Association (GSA) (source: Mr. Murphy-Perron is
entitled to his interpretation that these tactics represent the same ideological current as those
reported on by Ms. Granovsky-Larsen and Ms. Loreto.

In 2012, while Mr. Golovko was CUSA President, a motion was passed CUSA Council that was
successful in changing CUSAs Discrimination on Campus policy to one which would allow anti-
choice materials on campus, in addition to [taking] away reserved spaces for minority groups.
(sources: and and While Mr. Golovko
abstained, according to the meeting minutes, the majority of his fellow executives voted in favour of
the policy. Mr. Golovko was also a member of a secret Facebook group designed to [collaborate]
in private outside council meetings on motions, strategy, and election candidates (source:, and meetings were
scheduled to ensure that non-ABC-allied councillors would be unable to attend (Here, the
participation in this letter of former CUSA Councillor Alex Watson is particularly relevant. Mr.
Watson adds the following on this: Having been a member of CUSA council from 2012-2014,and
one who was originally elected in collaboration with the ABC slate, I can personally attest to the
truth of this claim surrounding the scheduling of meetings. I was a member of the aforementioned
'secret group' and there were indeed discussion that revolved around scheduling meetings at
inconvenient times for our opponents. It is simply disingenuous, and knowingly malicious for
someone such as Mr. Golovko to claim that this statement is defamatory.). Mr. Murphy-Perron is
entitled to represent these facts in his published work.

In 2013, a Free Speech Wall was erected at Carleton University by the Carleton Students for
Liberty. It contained a number of statements that students on campus found objectionable, and
that they would characterize as hate speech. CUSA took no steps to respond to the concerns of
these students, and instead, when the Free Speech Wall was torn down, chose to condemn an
act of vandalism (sources:
vandalism/ and
speech-opponent/) (Here, the participation in this letter of Arun Smith, the student who tore down
the Free Speech Wall, is particularly relevant). Mr. Golovko voted in favour of the motion to
condemn, according to the meeting minutes. (source:
content/uploads/2013/05/Minutes-Jan-27.pdf) Mr. Murphy-Perron is entitled to publish the facts
as they were, and to inject his own commentary and interpretation.

Mr. Murphy-Perron, through his published piece, has established a fair comment case to make
these determinations. Further, it is clear that the evidence supports that he is entitled to render a
such conclusion. These statements are, accordingly, in no way absolutely false, defamatory,
factually baseless[,] and designed to destroy [CazaSaikaleys] clients impeccable reputation and
cause harm to their families, and it is perhaps important here to note that the Mr. Golovko and the
various iterations of ABC do not have an impeccable reputation by any meaningful standard.

Unless Ms. Black is a mind-reader, there is no way for her to be able to establish Mr. Murphy-
Perrons purpose beyond a good faith representation of fair comment, and unless current CUSA
executives are planning to seek re-election and have confided that information in Mr. Murphy-
Perron, there is no way for her to be able to determine that his statements were intentionally
designed to scare them. It strikes us as absurd to think that any court would allow this argument
to proceed, and we are inclined to question Ms. Blacks judgment in including this.
We hope that by sending this letter, which we are going to publish as an open letter, we might
provide the necessary additional information to prevent student funds from being used in support
of silencing fair comment criticism. We are indeed troubled by CUSAs use of student funds to
cover the legal expenses of a former CUSA President, and we hope that this letter dissuades
CUSA from their continued frivolous expenditure of student funds.
Yours very sincerely,

Alex Watson Arun Smith