JHSS Public Legal Counsel successfully argues habeas corpus case in King’s Bench for federal inmate

JHSS’s Public Legal Counsel has won a case at Court of King’s Bench for Saskatchewan which will see a federal inmate returned to minimum security after having been transferred to higher security without due process.

The inmate, represented by Grace Gardner, JHSS Managing Public Legal Counsel, was involuntarily transferred last spring from the minimum security unit of the Saskatchewan Penitentiary to the medium security unit.

“At the absolute minimum, when an administrative decision is being made, the affected inmate has the right to know the case against him, and to have the opportunity to respond,” said Grace Gardner.

“In this particular case, there is a specific set of guidelines that must be followed throughout the transfer process. More specifically, the inmate must be given any type of documentation that is used in the decision-making process, so he is able to respond adequately.”

“Despite having the right to disclosure, this inmate was not provided with any paperwork throughout the transfer process. Failure to provide the inmate with the necessary paperwork rendered the transfer decision unlawful due to a lack of procedural fairness, warranting habeas corpus relief.”

The inmate applied to the Court for a writ of habeas corpus, ultimately requesting that the transfer decision be set aside and that he be returned to minimum security.

An inmates’ experience in medium security is starkly different than in minimum security unit. In minimum, inmates live in houses where they have their own bedrooms and cook for themselves. The inmate in this case was granted leave to work during the day, would return in the evening, work out at the gym, visit with family, make dinner with his housemates, clean up and go to bed.

“It provided him with a sense of normalcy, and assisted with his reintegration plan,” said Gardner.

The move to medium meant only a few hours outside of his cell everyday, apart from meals. He also had less time to visit with family members. These change negatively impacted the client’s mental health, Gardner said.

“It’s quite restrictive,” she said. “Medium security resembles the typical jail atmosphere most people think of. In minimum, it felt like he was a contributing member of society.”

In court, Gardner’s client testified that he did not receive the proper documentation from the Penitentiary in relation to the transfer. Ultimately the judge agreed, stating the Respondents did not demonstrate that the inmate’s right to be heard and to an impartial hearing were upheld.

In the decision, the judge noted that the allegation forming the basis of the reason for the transfer was not provided in documentation presented to the inmate, that there was an inconsistency of dates during the respondents’ testimonies and that overall, the procedure neglected to fully inform the inmate of the case or to provide him with a chance to answer it and form a rebuttal as is his right in the guidelines.

“It is not enough to tell the inmate at one time or another what allegations have been made against him. The inmate has the right to know which allegations will form the basis of involuntary transfer,” the judge wrote.

The writ of habeas corpus was granted on April 8, 2026. The inmate was officially transferred back to minimum security on April 14, 2026.

“When an administrative decision is being made about someone’s life, that person has the right to know why the decision is being made, what the decision is, and the opportunity to be heard. This is the baseline for procedural fairness in the correctional setting,” said Gardner.

“Our hope is that this decision will show inmates that someone is listening to them, and that the Public Legal Counsel program will ensure they have someone in their corner whenever possible.”