Man up CPC: three lines of sense
Predictably, the CJC has rejected the Moon Report’s call to repeal s. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. My new pal Bernie Farber says, ” we are interested in exploring some of his recommended changes to the administration of the law, as we have always maintained that the real current problem lies with its implementation.”
Moon has made a strong case for the repeal of s. 13. It reflects the constitutional jurisprudence and the fact that freedom of speech is an awkward fit for the CHRC. The CPC at its policy convention made a strong case for the repeal of s. 13. The Minister of Justice, Rob Nicholson, voted for that repeal with the proviso that he was awaiting the Moon Report. Now he has it.
Lynch and the CHRC are fighting for their ability to keep the hate speech jurisdiction which they should never have had in the first place. She wants several months of consultations and then a Report to Parliament. The CJC is more than happy to chat with her about tweaking s. 13.
It is time to say: ENOUGH!
Which means it is time for the CPC and Prime Minister Harper to bring in a one line bill which repeals s. 13. They know that they have the votes to pass such a bill so just get on with it.
However, to throw Bernie a bone, perhaps it should be a two line bill: the second line would address “problems with its implementation” by way of a judicial inquiry into the administration of s.13 and the conduct of the Hate Crimes Unit of the CHRC. This would give the CJC somewhere to make submissions and could get right to the very bottom of the corruption, lies and deceit which have so sullied the administration of justice in the hands of the Commission and the Tribunal.
And we might want to append a third line which would dismiss all current and pending proceedings under s.13.
November 24th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
“And we might want to append a third line which would dismiss all current and pending proceedings under s.13.”
.....and compensate all previous defendants/victims for their legal costs and and fines or penalties associated with the CHRT ruling?
November 24th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
Yes. Let’s write a cheque for Terry Tremaine!. Excellent idea! After that, a posthumous apology to the sorely misunderstood Mr. Hitler!
November 24th, 2008 at 6:32 pm
The professional victimhood mongers are not happy with Moon’s report because they were never happy with legal equality. They demand extra equal status for their “psychological security” as a section 15(2)victim’s group.
Well at least it’s out…now who do they really speak for?
National referendum any one?
Burny?
Want to run an election on your pathetic self centered needs?
Wornout K want to ask the boss about this albatross?
November 24th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
Jay, well at least you don’t have a total mental breakdown focusing on Farber as does you pal Ezra. I can only believe given the malice with which Ezra writes about Farber taht he is secretly jealous of him.
Secondly, his view that the PM and the CPC does not respect CJC, funny given the fact that just last week there was a front page picture of CJC leaders meeting with the PM. Hell if you go on to the CJC website you will see other similar photos of CJC and the PM.
And with all the new jobs in Ottawa under the CPC banner one would have thought that Ezra would have scored something. Alas he is back doing the only job he seems able to get as of late…blogging.
November 25th, 2008 at 7:59 am
“I can only believe given the malice with which Ezra writes about Farber taht he is secretly jealous of him.”
...
“Alas he is back doing the only job he seems able to get as of late…blogging.”
Writing with malice == secretly jealous, good point.
November 25th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Despite WLMR’s idea of the “professional victimhood mongers” as yet another mass conspiracy against something, where is this outcry in favour of s.13? Where is this mass of support? I just don’t see any organized general position in favour of the appropriately described “awkward fit” of speech in a context other than criminal prosecution – or perhaps civil litigation of tortious representations were alleged. If there is no such “action front” or lobby group, what stops Harper from actually doing something?
November 25th, 2008 at 11:25 am
truewest: I think Mr Boisson deserves an apology and a lifting of his legal burden. Mr Boisson is wrongheaded, but what he wrote should never have been cause for a court case.
WLRR, re: “National referendum any one? ” Well, I suppose, but my rights are properly mine in the first place; they’re not permissions given by a majority.
November 25th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
> “posthumous apology to the sorely misunderstood Mr. Hitler!”
Well, obviously if someone was guilty of a real crime (murder, assault, property vandalism, or threatening to do any of these things) you wouldn’t compensate them just because they were also accused of a fake crime.
On the other hand, someone like Boisson who’s only guilty of a pseudo-crime should, of course, be fully compensated. Preferably out of Lucy Warman’s shakedown loot. Reparations now!