Man's pleas to abolish Catholic Church rejected by B.C. Supreme Court judge

Clouds are lit by the rising sun over St. Augustine Roman Catholic Church in Philadelphia, on Sept. 27, 2015. (AP / Julio Cortez)

The B.C. Supreme Court has no power to abolish the Catholic Church, one of its judges has ruled.

Justice Karrie Wolfe, while expressing some sympathy towards petitioner Andres Ruiz’s requests to stamp out the entire Roman Catholic Church and seize its assets as retribution for its child sex abuse scandals, said there were “a number of problems” with his case.

Filed by Ruiz in July, the petition called for the abolition of the church and the handing over of its institutions to the Canadian government, alongside the confiscation of its stocks.

Ruiz also requested financial compensation and immigration security for himself, as a “reward” for bringing the petition to the courts.

“The facts as set out in the petition are sweeping allegations of the global commission of heinous crimes by the Catholic Church in British Columbia, in Canada and beyond,” Wolfe wrote in her decision, which was issued in August and published on the court's website late last month.  

The claims Ruiz made against the church contained non-admissible evidence taken from Wikipedia articles, news reports and “information about Hollywood movies,” she wrote. 

Ruiz also leaned on global public apologies issued by officials on behalf of the Roman Catholic Church, alongside previous criminal cases.

Wolfe rejected Ruiz’s call for the seizure of the Catholic Church’s assets, on the grounds that most of the seizures sought were of property located either outside of Canada or outside the province. The Catholic Church assets that are located in B.C. were not specifically described or listed in Ruiz's petition.

“The general relief sought in the petition is very broad, certainly beyond the geographic jurisdiction of this court,” Wolfe wrote.

There was nothing in the petition, or the materials given, that would create the authority for the court to order seizure and forfeiture of property from the church, she added.

Wolfe wrote that even if the petition were supported by sufficient evidence, which she didn’t consider it to be, an apology from the church is not valid grounds to seize its assets – which would comprise numerous universities, secondary schools, hospitals, seminaries, cathedrals and basilicas from across the country.

Even, she added, if the official apologizing was the supreme pontiff himself.

“It does not follow that an apology from a public official for the Roman Catholic Church – even from the Pope – creates a legal basis on which the court could order seizure and forfeiture of assets and real property or could order the Government of Canada to assume responsibility for seized goods,” the decision reads. 

Wolfe wrote that there were also concerns with Ruiz’s attempts to put forward the petition on behalf of the public, despite not having engaged with the public when putting it together.

“It is not brought as a representative petition or any kind of collective proceeding,” she added.

Wolfe, who dismissed Ruiz’s plea for immigration help and advised him that any visa concerns should be addressed through the Immigration and Refugee Board, did sympathize with the petitioner's concerns, despite rejecting his petition.

“I have no doubt that Mr. Ruiz considers these to be serious matters. I have no doubt that he considers that some form of redress should flow from the actions of the Catholic Church,” she wrote. 

“But the difficulty for Mr. Ruiz is that in order to seek the assistance and co-operation of the court in obtaining such redress, there must be a legal basis on which the court can act.”

Wolfe added she could not advise Ruiz on whether there would be an alternate route to gaining assistance from the court, and if he wanted to take his request further, he should look into independent legal aid.