right to collective bargaining. Although everybody was free not to belong to a trade union. a sum equal to the amount of union dues was deducted from each salary, but any person who for social, religious or cultural reasons refused to join a trade union could declare himself a conscientious objector and be Concerning restrictions on assembly in exempted from paying union dues. certain places, the Supreme Court decision in 1982 on a case concerning the requirement to obtain a permit to hold a march in the city of Montreal would undoubtedly undergo further review in the future. Freedom of exoressti 79. In connection it was asked whether with that issue, “false news” was a crime under Canadian law and whether information held by public authorities. the dissemination of everyone had access to 80. In his reply, the representative explained that the dissemination of “false news” was an offence under Canadian law although it was a difficult The term “false news” did not extend to false information offence to prove. disseminated in the belief that it was true. Access to information was covered by laws on freedom of information and on privacy. A commissioner for access to information had been appointed. Anyone could obtain information held by government institutions provided that the information was not detrimental to federal, provincial or international relations, did not concern a current criminal investigation, and was not protected by the Privacy Act. Erotection of fv 81. With reference to that issue, members of the Committee wished to know whether all discrimination between spouses and all differences in the status and rights between children born in and out of wedlock had been eliminated under the various federal, provincial and territorial laws; and whether there had been any further development of case law since the submission of the second periodic report confirming that discrimination on the grounds of marital and family status was prohibited under section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 82. Observiny that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms did not seem to provide any specific protection for the rights of the family, members asked whether those rights were recognised in any other part of Canada’s law. It was also asked whether recent changes in the laws governing immigration haa deprived the dependants of immigrants who had already been admitted to Canada of the priority which they had previously enjoyed; how the immigration authorities would treat an application from members of an immigrant’s family who had not yet joined the immigrant in Canada: whether the behaviour of an immigrant’s children might affect his right to stay in Canada: and what measures had been taken to promote family unity among indigenous groups. Further information was also sought about a recent amendment to the Divorce Act of 1985, under which a person might be refused a civil divorce if he or she had refused to cooperate in the removal of a religious barrier to the remarriage of the other spouse; and about the problem posed by minors joining religious cults without the consent of their parents. 03. In his reply, the representative provincial and territorial legislation of the State party said that recent had eliminated all distinctions between -2o-