Internet Sciences Inc. Issues Statement Regarding Ontario Capital Markets Tribunal December 15, 2025, Publication

Deep Corruption at Capital Market Tribunal -Adjudicator Ruled on Her Own Misconduct Motions and Ruled on Proceedings Involving Her Two Decades Law Firm Client

NEW YORK, NY, UNITED STATES, December 18, 2025 /EINPresswire.com/ -- Internet Sciences Inc., a U.S.-based issuer, issues this statement to correct the public record following a press release disseminated on December 15, 2025 through CNW/Cision and globally republished by third-party outlets including Yahoo Finance, PublicNow, VicNews, and other automated news aggregation and financial media platforms.

The December 15, 2025 publication referenced decisions and orders of the Ontario Capital Markets Tribunal in a Section 8 review involving Internet Sciences Inc. and CNSX Markets Inc. (the Canadian Securities Exchange). A Section 8 review is an administrative review process governed by the Capital Markets Tribunal and the Ontario Securities Commission. It is not a lawsuit. Internet Sciences issues this clarification because the form, timing, and content of the publication create a misleading public impression that the company is embroiled in litigation or subject to adverse judicial findings, which is inaccurate and prejudicial.

The decisions referenced in the December 15, 2025 publication were authored by Adjudicator Andrea Burke. Ms. Burke is identified in publicly available biographies as a senior partner of Davies Ward Phillips & Vineberg LLP, a firm that has represented the Canadian Securities Exchange for approximately two decades. The Canadian Securities Exchange is the direct opposing party to Internet Sciences in the ongoing Section 8 review.

Internet Sciences filed multiple motions before publication warning of serious procedural defects, conflicts of interest, and the foreseeable reputational and commercial harm that publication would cause. These included Motion 4 and supplemental submissions seeking a permanent stay of publication, as well as Motions 6, 6A, and 6B seeking the removal of Adjudicator Burke on the basis that she was ruling on matters concerning her own conduct and on matters involving a long-standing client of her firm.

Despite these motions, Adjudicator Burke did not recuse herself. She dismissed the removal motions, denied the publication stay, and proceeded to authorize publication of contested statements on the Tribunal’s website and through a newswire service. The motions, replies, and evidentiary materials filed by Internet Sciences were not addressed in any public forum and were not released alongside the publication. As a result, the December 15, 2025 press release presented conclusions without context, supporting materials, or opposing submissions, creating a one-sided and misleading public narrative.

Internet Sciences advised the Tribunal, the Ontario Securities Commission, the Chief Executive Officer of the Ontario Securities Commission, and the Chair of the Canadian Securities Administrators over multiple motions and communications that publication under these circumstances would be defamatory, constitute false light, and cause irreversible harm once syndicated through global media systems. Internet Sciences further advised that once published, third-party platforms would continue to carry the content unless a formal retraction or corrective notice was issued by the original publisher.

Internet Sciences also notified the Tribunal that publication could be halted or suspended immediately through the newswire service with minimal effort. Nevertheless, the publication proceeded and was re-issued on December 15, 2025.

Because the Section 8 review directly implicates the Multijurisdictional Disclosure System northbound framework under the Canada–United States MJDS treaty, and because Internet Sciences is a U.S. issuer whose non-prospectus offering and attempted Canadian listing were subject to that framework, Internet Sciences informed U.S. authorities, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the U.S. Department of State, and the U.S. Department of Commerce. These agencies have jurisdiction over securities regulation, international trade, treaty compliance, and cross-border commercial treatment of U.S. companies. Internet Sciences sought assistance after being procedurally outnumbered by the Ontario Securities Commission, the Capital Markets Tribunal, and the Canadian Securities Exchange, and after internal remedies failed to prevent publication of contested and prejudicial material.

U.S. officials have been copied on substantive communications with the Tribunal, the Ontario Securities Commission, and the Canadian Securities Administrators so they may assess whether enforcement action, treaty-based intervention, or policy review is warranted.

Internet Sciences expressly cautions journalists, editors, legal commentators, and financial media outlets not to rely solely on publications authored or authorized by Adjudicator Andrea Burke without reviewing the full evidentiary record, including the motions, supplemental submissions, and replies filed by Internet Sciences. Those materials were not released by the Tribunal despite their relevance and despite repeated requests. The absence of those materials materially distorts the public understanding of the matter.

Internet Sciences provided the Tribunal with a final opportunity to mitigate harm by removing the impugned content from its website and issuing a corrective retraction through the same newswire distribution service no later than December 17, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. In the absence of such action, Internet Sciences is publishing this statement to correct the public record and preserve its legal and reputational interests.

Internet Sciences is prepared to provide serious investigative journalists, law journalists, law reviews, academic journals, and business journalists across television, print, and digital media with the full factual background, including the motions, submissions, and replies filed in this proceeding, to enable informed and responsible reporting. Media inquiries may be directed to media@internetsciences.co.

Legal footnote:
The Supreme Court of Canada has held that decision-makers must not adjudicate matters involving their own conduct or matters involving clients with whom they have a professional relationship, and that justice must both be done and be seen to be done. See Committee for Justice and Liberty v. National Energy Board, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 369; Wewaykum Indian Band v. Canada, 2003 SCC 45. Publication of false or misleading statements under such circumstances may give rise to liability for defamation and false light.

Internet Sciences Inc
Internet Sciences Inc
+1 212-823-6272
Media@internetsciences.co

Legal Disclaimer:

EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.