SASKATOON, Saskatchewan — John Olubobokun, the former director of a private Christian school in Saskatoon, is mounting an appeal against his recent assault convictions and sentencing, arguing that the court failed to adequately consider the context of corporal punishment policies in place at the time.
Olubobokun was found guilty in July of nine counts of assault with a weapon stemming from incidents where he paddled students at Christian Centre Academy during the early to mid-2000s. The school, which has since undergone name changes to Legacy Christian School and now operates as Valour Academy, was the site of these events. In December, Olubobokun pleaded guilty to an additional five counts related to similar disciplinary actions.
His initial sentence, handed down after the July convictions, was an 18-month conditional term to be served in the community. Following his December plea, the court added five more months to that sentence. Now, Olubobokun and his legal team are challenging both the convictions and the overall sentencing, with the appeal process underway in the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.
Ron Piché, Olubobokun's lawyer, has cited several grounds for the appeal, primarily focusing on what he describes as the trial judge's selective evaluation of evidence. “We take the view that the court didn’t properly weigh the fact that there was clearly a policy at the school that permitted this type of corporal punishment,” Piché said in a recent interview. He emphasized that the discipline occurred before Canada banned corporal punishment in schools in 2004, a change brought about by amendments to the Criminal Code that prohibited physical force in educational settings.
Piché further argued that the judge applied uneven scrutiny to witness testimonies. “In our view, the judge was fairly selective in the way she viewed Mr. Olubobokun’s evidence, in fact defence evidence generally, whereas the same scrutiny, if I can put it that way, was not applied to the Crown witnesses,” he stated. This, according to Piché, led to an unfair outcome in the convictions for the nine counts from July.
Another key element of the appeal revolves around parental consent. Piché noted that parents of the students involved had agreed to the school's disciplinary practices at the time. “We’re also suggesting that the court did not weigh significantly the fact that the parents consented to this type of discipline,” he said. This consent, the defence contends, should mitigate the severity of the charges and sentencing.
During his December sentencing hearing, Olubobokun expressed remorse for the impact of his actions. He apologized to the affected students and their families, acknowledging the harm caused by the paddling incidents. Despite this apology, the defence is now seeking a conditional discharge for Olubobokun, which would allow him to avoid a criminal record if he meets certain conditions over a specified period.
The case has drawn attention to the historical use of corporal punishment in Canadian private schools, particularly those with religious affiliations. Christian Centre Academy, founded in the 1990s as an alternative to public education, emphasized biblical principles in its curriculum and discipline. At the time of the incidents, paddling was a common practice in some independent schools, viewed by administrators as a biblically sanctioned method of correction, such as references to Proverbs in the Old Testament.
Canada's legal landscape shifted significantly in 2004 when the Supreme Court of Canada, in the case of R v. Zingsheim and subsequent legislative changes, effectively outlawed corporal punishment in schools nationwide. Prior to that, while public schools had largely phased it out, private institutions sometimes retained such policies with parental approval. Olubobokun's appeal highlights the tension between historical practices and modern legal standards, as the incidents predated the ban but were prosecuted under current laws.
Prosecutors from the Crown, who have not yet publicly responded in detail to the appeal filing, successfully argued during the trial that the paddling constituted assault with a weapon, given the use of a paddle as the instrument. The victims, former students now in their 20s and 30s, came forward years after the events, prompted by a broader reckoning with past abuses in educational settings. Their testimonies described the paddlings as excessive and traumatic, leading to lasting emotional impacts.
One aspect of the defence's challenge involves the timing of the discipline. All incidents occurred between 2000 and 2004, just before the national prohibition. Piché maintains that the school's explicit policy, outlined in enrollment documents signed by parents, provided a legal and ethical framework for the actions. “This was not rogue behavior; it was in line with the school's established guidelines,” he added, underscoring the institutional context.
The appeal process is expected to move forward in the coming months, with written submissions from both the defence and the Crown due by spring. A hearing date has not been set, but legal observers anticipate it could occur as early as late summer or fall, depending on the court's docket. If successful, the appeal could overturn some or all of the July convictions, potentially reducing Olubobokun's sentence or granting the requested conditional discharge.
Olubobokun, who served as director of Christian Centre Academy from the late 1990s until around 2008, has maintained a low profile since the trial. Now in his 60s, he has expressed through his lawyer a desire to clear his name and move forward without the burden of a criminal record. The case has sparked discussions among educators and child welfare advocates about retrospective prosecutions of pre-ban disciplinary actions.
Child protection organizations, such as the Canadian Centre for Child Protection, have welcomed the original convictions as a step toward accountability for historical abuses. “Even if policies allowed it then, the harm to children is what matters now,” said a spokesperson for the group in a statement following the July verdict. They emphasized the importance of survivor voices in shaping legal outcomes.
On the other side, some supporters of faith-based education argue that the case represents an overreach by modern standards into past practices. Private school associations in Saskatchewan have remained neutral, but individual administrators have privately voiced concerns about the chilling effect on religious freedoms in discipline. The appeal, they say, could set a precedent for how historical consent and policy are weighed in similar cases.
As the legal battle unfolds, the story of Christian Centre Academy serves as a microcosm of evolving norms in Canadian education. What began as a small private institution serving a few hundred students has transformed into Valour Academy, which now promotes a zero-tolerance approach to physical discipline in line with contemporary laws. For former students and staff, the proceedings reopen old wounds while prompting reflection on how schools balance authority, faith, and child rights.
The broader implications extend beyond Saskatoon. Across Canada, similar allegations have surfaced in other private and religious schools, leading to investigations and policy reviews. Saskatchewan's Ministry of Education has stated that all independent schools must comply with provincial standards, including bans on corporal punishment, and conducts regular audits to ensure adherence.
Olubobokun's appeal underscores ongoing debates about retroactivity in law. Legal experts note that while the acts predated the 2004 ban, assault charges can still apply if the force exceeded reasonable limits under common law principles. The Court of Appeal will ultimately decide whether the trial judge's weighing of evidence, including school policies and parental consent, warrants a reversal.
For now, Olubobokun remains on his conditional sentence, reporting to authorities and adhering to terms that include no contact with the victims. His lawyer remains optimistic. “We're confident that a fresh look at the full context will lead to a more balanced outcome,” Piché concluded. As submissions are prepared, the case continues to highlight the complex interplay between tradition, law, and accountability in Canada's educational history.