Canada’s Criminal Code is tough on hate speech, and rightly so.**
Those who incite or willfully promote hatred against identifiable groupscan spend two years in jail. (Would that include an identifiable group known as European Canadians? — Ed.)
Beyond that, does society need tocast additional chills on freedom of speech and spirited publicdiscourse, to combat hatred? In the Star‘s view, no.
Buta controversial section of the Canadian Human Rights Act does justthat. Section 13 makes it a “discriminatory practice” to communicate”any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred orcontempt” via the Internet. That can be interpreted to cover defamingor stereotyping, a wider net than inciting hatred. Unlike the CriminalCode, there’s no need to prove intent. And the penalty is serious. Thefederal rights tribunal can order the offending party to desist, tosmarten up, and to pay as much as $30,000 in damages and penalties.
Given Criminal Code protections, this needlessly chills free speech.
That’s why Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government should heedthe advice of Richard Moon. In a cogent report released this week, theUniversity of Windsor law professor argues that Section 13 should berepealed. The report says the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC)should let the courts police hate speech advocating violence. Moon isright.
The CHRC commissioned Moon’s review after complaints weremade against journalists Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant for allegedlyexposing Muslims to contempt and hatred. Moon concludes that “lessextreme forms of discriminatory expression” that stereotype or defame”although harmful, cannot simply be censored out of public discourse.”That is an important perspective.
Moon also notes that Canada’spress councils exist to field readers’ complaints that publicationsfall short of the craft standards. The Star, a member of theOntario Press Council, publishes decisions affecting us. But manypublications do not belong to the councils. Moon believes they should.That too is sound advice.
**Nonsense. Either the CHRC stasi is a good thing orits not. Either the criminal code is sufficient, or its not. You can’t have it both ways. — Ed.