From Mao to mandatory training: Alberta lawyer challenges Law Society over compelled ideology
Roger Song was called to the Alberta bar in 2014, bringing with him years of experience as a law professor in Beijing. But his memories of life under Maoist China—marked by political indoctrination and government coercion—never faded. Those memories resurfaced in 2019, when the Law Society of Alberta required him to complete a “cultural competence” training course to keep his license to practise law in the province.
According to Mr. Song, this mandatory training reminded him of the ideological conformity he experienced under the Chinese regime.
Challenging the Law Society of Alberta
Undeterred, Mr. Song launched a constitutional challenge in 2023 with lawyers provided by the Justice Centre.
At the centre of the challenge are a series of specific Society rules and codes:
- Rule 67.4 is being challenged for enabling the Society to impose a wide range of politicized requirements—not limited to Indigenous content.
- Rules 67.2 and 67.3 compel lawyers to submit annual Continuing Professional Development (CPD) plans tied to a new “Professional Development Profile,” which Mr. Song argues redefines legal competence as adherence to woke political beliefs.
- Part 6.3 of the Code of Professional Conduct, which addresses harassment and discrimination, is being challenged for seeking to redefine legal ethics and to suppress dissent.
- The Profile and the Code are further criticized for being so vague that they are impossible to navigate without adopting an approved ideological framework.
Together, these requirements form part of what the Society itself calls its “Political Objectives,” which Mr. Song argues constitute an abuse of regulatory power and a direct violation of the Society’s duty to shield the profession from political interference.
Appeal filed
On October 9, 2025, lawyers funded by the Justice Centre filed an appeal in the case of Alberta lawyer Roger Song, who is challenging the Law Society of Alberta’s authority to impose mandatory “cultural competence” and other ideological conditions on lawyers.
The appeal follows a September 2025 ruling by the Court of King’s Bench that upheld the Law Society’s power to compel ideological training and to amend its Code of Conduct to include broad prohibitions on “harassment” and “discrimination.” Mr. Song, a former law professor from Beijing who lived through Mao’s Cultural Revolution, argues that these measures amount to compelled ideology and violate his Charter rights to freedom of conscience and expression.
The appeal contests several Law Society rules and policies that redefine professional competence in ideological terms and compel participation in politically motivated training.
Constitutional lawyer Glenn Blackett said, “The Law Society seems bent on transforming Alberta lawyers into a sort of woke commissariat, who see Western legal systems like our Constitution as systems of colonial and anti-black oppression.”
Canadians urged to speak out as regulators push ideological agendas
On Wednesday, December 3, 2025, the Justice Centre launched a national campaign urging all provinces to adopt legislation that restores professional regulators to their proper role of overseeing competence and ethics, rather than compelling speech or imposing political ideology on regulated professionals who serve the public.
Lawyer asks Court of Appeal to consider full lower court record
Mr. Song’s appeal has now moved into a procedural phase focused on what materials the Court of Appeal of Alberta will be permitted to consider. Lawyers funded by the Justice Centre have filed an application asking the Court for permission to include written arguments from Mr. Song’s original Court of King’s Bench proceeding as part of the appeal record.
According to Mr. Song, these materials are necessary because the lower court did not respond to important arguments raised in his constitutional challenge. He argues that without access to the full written record, he cannot properly demonstrate on appeal where the lower court failed to address key issues.
Constitutional lawyer Glenn Blackett said, “Mr. Song has already been denied justice when the lower Court substantively failed to respond to the case he made. The Court of Appeal’s procedural rules, which would keep that case largely out of the appeal record, threaten a second denial.”
The Court of Appeal is expected to decide whether Mr. Song’s lower court materials will be included in the appeal record before the parties proceed with appeal factums and scheduling of the hearing.
To review the latest procedural filings, please see the Explore Case Documents section below.
