Moon Light
The principal recommendation of this report is that section 13 be repealed so that the censorship of Internet hate speech is dealt with exclusively by the criminal law.64 A narrowly drawn ban on hate speech that focuses on expression that is tied to violence does not fit easily or simply into a human rights law that takes an expansive view of discrimination and seeks to advance the goal of social equality through education and conciliation. For reasons discussed in the next part of this section, the process established in the CHRA for receiving and investigating complaints of discrimination is poorly suited to section 13 complaints.65 More generally, there is a tension between the general purpose or ethos of the CHRA and the narrow definition of hate speech adopted by the CHRT and, with some refinement, supported in this report. moon report
I am just digging in for what I suspect will be a fascinating read.
November 24th, 2008 at 9:49 am
So, to summarize, people properly responding to human rights hate talk complaints generally win and, when finally studied by officialdom, the law is deemed screamingly inappropriate. What has been the government’s reluctance to tackle this? Not the backlash as there is no real backlash. Not the point of law as no hearing or academic is pointing out that it is a centerpiece of anything. Not constitutional necessity as it actually largely violates the constitution – except no one tried even to raise that argument in a proper venue.
It’s the little provision that couldn’t – couldn’t achieve anything, couldn’t express an idea anyone really accepted, couldn’t resolve a mischief or stop a wrong. I can’t think of a more paper-y paper tiger. No one will really miss it when it is gone.
November 24th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Amazing what academe can resolve when tickled with 50-big $.
I agree 100% with sending any “communications” crime through the legitimate law courts. I do not believe in prosecuting victimless crimes.
Let’s hope that 320.1 of the Criminal Code is not turned into a an excuse to have covert police investigations of the internet. I see little difference between CHRC employees misrepresenting themselves and entraping people by enticing them to break the law and the police doing so. Moon recommends “Hate crime squads” in each province…will these be like internet “narcs” and use unwarranted clandestine investigation techniques?
No crime of communications should proceed without a complaint from a victim with provable damages. “Hate speech” can only create a victim if the public communication directly prompts others to physically harm another simply for being the member of a group the communication stigmatizes.
The law’s application should also be blind as to what “group” the accused is recommending be attacked…for instance; someone saying “kill all Christians” or “kill all whites” is as culpable as someone who recommends the genocide of any group such as publicly recommending ; “all Israelis over 18 should be killed”.