Thanks to Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) and passionate advocates of unsanctioned freedom of speech, Internet blogger Marc Lemire now stands at the apex of a remarkably heated controversy in human rights law. Anti-Racist Canada (2012) recalled that five months after the launch of his Freedom-Site on the Internet in January 1996, Lemire used his website to promote his CD-ROM, via a Stormfront mailing list, that was, “filled to the brim with Pro-White files, including sound files, movies, pictures, and text files.” This CD-ROM caught the attention of Richard Warman, a human rights lawyer and former employee of the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC). He then wasted no time in accusing Lemire of a violation of Section 13 of the CHRA. As it stands today, Section 13 explicitly states that it is discriminatory to communicate via the phone or the Internet any material “that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt.” This effectively placed the monitoring of communication over these electronic media under the jurisdiction of the CHRC. At this point, many Canadians felt that this infringed unreasonably upon their fundamental freedom of speech. They have continued to allege that this law is unconstitutional and a blatant form of censorship. Steyn (2009) reported that Judge Hadjis of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, who tried Lemire’s case, proceeded to dismiss the charge as he too shared the public’s view. The CHRC appealed the decision made by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in Warman v. Lemire to the Federal Court of Canada, a ruling from which may or may not establish a precedent that will effectively negate Section 13. However, the assertion, made by members of the public and Judge Hadj...
... middle of paper ...
...-Hate Laws and Freedom of Expression (Publication No. 2010-31E). Retrieved from http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/
ResearchPublications/2010-31-e.htm. Accessed on Mar. 17, 2012.
Steyn, M. (2009, September 17). It took a while but Section 13 is dead. Macleans.
Retrieved from http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/09/17/it-took-a-while-but-section-13-is-dead/. Accessed on Mar. 17, 2012.
Slane, A. (2011). Hate Speech, Public Communication and Emerging Communications
Technologies. Retrieved from http://www.chrc-ccdp.ca/proactive_initiatives/hoi_hsi/page10-eng.aspx. Accessed on Mar. 18, 2012.
University of Ontario Institute of Technology. (2006). Notable Canadian Hate Crime
Cases. In Reading Hate: Hate Crime Research and Scholarship in Canada. Retrieved from http://criminologyandjustice.uoit.ca/hatecrime/cases.html. Accessed on Mar. 17, 2012.
Maidment, M. (2009). When justice is a game: Unravelling wrongful convictions in Canada. Canada: Fernwood Publishing.
The case of R. v. Krymowski was around hate speech against the Roma people, also known as the “Gypsies”. A protest was staged by 25 neo-Nazis and other people in front of the motel where the Roma refugees were staying when they were allowed into Canada in 1997. These groups of individuals held up signs in order to gain support from the whole community to extradite/get rid of all the Gypsies who have immigrated. They eventually started getting assistance from a large group of people including public officials, police officers, members of the press and etc. Along with this were newspaper articles which were being published criticising the Roma people saying how they treated their wives and even their daughters unequally compared to the men in the family. They also believed that the Roma’s educated their children how to steal. About 3 weeks into the whole debate, the protesting began which last approximately over 2 hours. The Neo-Nazis held up some horrifying signs around the hotel where the Roma refugees were staying. Some signs stating “Honk if you hate Gypsies”, “Canada is not a Trash Can”, “You’re a cancer to Canada” and “G.S.T – Gypsies Suck Taxes”. However, there were no direct situations towards the Roma people during the whole period of the peaceful protest. Approximately 4 months after the protest had occurred; the police force entered numerous homes of individuals after extreme public lobbying by pressure groups. A number of people were charged with wilful promotion also known as hate crime. The Crown attempted to prove that the people that took place in the protest violated the Criminal Code by having hatred towards an identifiable group of people and tried to establish that the Neo-Nazis along w...
Apart from the other laws in Canada’s constitution, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is an important law that affects every Canadian’s rights and freedoms. It was created in 1981 by former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau to provide legal protection for the most important rights and freedoms. These rights include fundamental freedoms, democratic rights, mobility rights, and legal rights. Most but not all articles included in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights are protected in the constitution. However, if a Canadian feels that their rights are violated, they can challenge laws and unfair actions using the justice system. In my opinion, I believe the Canadian Charter of Human Rights somewhat protects Canadians’ rights and freedoms to some extent depending on the situation.
This relation believes that the “law shapes --and is shaped by-- the society in which it operates (Elizabeth Comack,2014) As people our interactions and experiences are administered by our social positioning in society, and that social location is conditioned by three key elements: our race, class, and gender. These three elements have been used to divide, separate and categorize society. (Comeck,2014) . Racial profiling is something that I believe is extremely evident in Canada. Racial profiling is defined as targeting individuals for law enforcement based on the colour of their skin, which can lead to practices like carding. (Chan, 2007). Carding is a police practice that involves stopping, questioning and documenting people in mostly non-criminal encounters. (Chan, 2007) Stopping people on the street for no reason to ask them who they are, and what they are up to is outrageous and can have fatal consequences. On September 24, 2014, at 10:00pm Jermaine Carby was sitting in the passenger seat of his friend’s car while out for a drive. They were pulled over for a traffic stop in Brampton by a Peel police officer. This police officer went around to the passenger’s side and asked Carby for his identity so he could card him. When conducting this street check the officer discovered the Vancouver had a warrant for his arrest. Allegedly, this is when Carby started threatening officers with a large knife. A knife that witnesses nor
A society that presumes a norm of violence and celebrates aggression, whether in the subway, on the football field, or in the conduct of its business, cannot help making celebrities of the people who would destroy it, (Lapham, 1985). Unfortunately, such acts of rampage have become a prevalent factor in the Canadian culture. As a result of endless media coverage, Canadians now are constantly bombarded with countless images of violence. Many of which often portray a victim avenging their opponent by force. Thus, indoctrinating individuals to believe that it is only through aggression that problems are resolved. Rather than being punished for acts of violence, those who commit such offenses are often praised for their “heroism”. In addition, the success of films like The Godfather, Gladiator, and Troy further aid in reinstating we live in a society that praises violence. Furthermore, this ideology allows for people to partake in violent acts with little or no backlash from ones community. However, when an person strays away from the “norm”, they are likely to then be viewed as a deviant. Such cases of rejection within a society, are often seen in the portrayal of serial killers. Although our society tends to condone violence when it is directed towards a specific individual(s), it does not allow the killing of innocent bystanders. Instead, crimes that are targeted against a number of people over a long period, entail the harshest forms punishments under the law. Sadly, in executing the law for said crimes, those in charge often face much public scrutiny. Such occurrences were apparent in the faulty murder investigations of Canada's most notorious serial killer Robert Pickton. This is due to the fact that, the negligence of the Vancou...
...between them and the “Others,” though after 9/11 this “innocences” of living in an harmonious world was no longer due to the actions of the ‘terrorists’ (Street, 2003). The inquiry report on racial profiling from OHRC was serving a purpose to demonstrate anti-hegemony which delineates as the refusal to give permission to all that is wrong, encourage the knowledge of different cultures, and oppose to a single powerful group from ruling the system (Stand, 2014). Informing Canadian’s on racial profiling is a great start to raising consciousness, however knowledge is not everything. Knowledge without answers is only awareness and in order to change racial profiling individuals need direction. Perhaps OHRC could present a new report with answers to end racial profiling or at least where to begin, because with proper guidance racial profiling can be modified and destroyed.
Democracy is more than merely a system of government. It is a culture – one that promises equal rights and opportunity to all members of society. Democracy can also be viewed as balancing the self-interests of one with the common good of the entire nation. In order to ensure our democratic rights are maintained and this lofty balance remains in tact, measures have been taken to protect the system we pride ourselves upon. There are two sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that were implemented to do just this. Firstly, Section 1, also known as the “reasonable limits clause,” ensures that a citizen cannot legally infringe on another’s democratic rights as given by the Charter. Additionally, Section 33, commonly referred to as the “notwithstanding clause,” gives the government the power to protect our democracy in case a law were to pass that does not violate our Charter rights, but would be undesirable. Professor Kent Roach has written extensively about these sections in his defence of judicial review, and concluded that these sections are conducive to dialogue between the judiciary and the legislature. Furthermore, he established that they encourage democracy. I believe that Professor Roach is correct on both accounts, and in this essay I will outline how sections 1 and 33 do in fact make the Canadian Charter more democratic. After giving a brief summary of judicial review according to Roach, I will delve into the reasonable limits clause and how it is necessary that we place limitations on Charter rights. Following this, I will explain the view Professor Roach and I share on the notwithstanding clause and how it is a vital component of the Charter. To conclude this essay, I will discuss the price at which democr...
Three decades ago, honorable Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau was establishing the renowned Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Since the three decades of being established, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has protected the individual rights and freedoms of thousands of Canadians. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has become a part of the national identity and has become a big patriotic symbol for the country. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is the document the truly separates Canada from all the other powerful nations and is really something that Canadian take a pride in. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms brings up many questions, but the biggest and most common question is How effectively does Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms protect your individual rights? . To exactly know how effectively it protects your rights you can look at situations where it has protected and has not protected the rights of Canadians. The Charter of Rights and Freedom protects legal rights of Canadian whether they are a teenager or an adult, protects equality rights of Canadian and provides government services to all Canadians no matter what, ensures all laws are passed according to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and provides equality rights and fundamental freedoms to Canadians for practicing their religion and other rights without interference.
In the article “Point: Racial Profiling in Law Enforcement is Unjust”, Adele Cassola determines that racial profiling is an extensive problem in policing across Canada. She identifies that racial profiling is based on stereotypes of race, ethnicity, and cultural background with African-Canadians, Arab-Canadians, and Aboriginal Canadians being targeted most frequently. Racial profiling is not unique to law enforcement and immigration, Cassola asserts, “it is a wide spread problem within other institutions and establishments as well” (2009). She discovered a survey that showed Toronto's African-Canadian secondary school students were stopped four times more frequently and searched six times more frequently than their non-black classmates. In an article from the Toronto Star newspaper in 2002, Cassola notes that African-Canadians were subject...
“Honey, you’re not a person, now get back in the kitchen and make me a sandwich!” If a husband were to say these words to his wife today, he would likely receive a well-deserved smack to the face. It is not until recently that Canadian women have received their status as people and obtained equal rights as men. Women were excluded from an academic education and received a lesser pay than their male counter parts. With the many hardships women had to face, women were considered the “slave of slaves” (Women’s Rights). In the past century, women have fought for their rights, transitioning women from the point of being a piece of property to “holding twenty-five percent of senior positions in Canada” (More women in top senior positions: Report). The Married Women’s Property Act, World War I, The Person’s Case, and Canadian Human Rights Act have gained Canadian women their rights.
Many people and nations around the world are deprived of human rights. The government in the countries or nations usually can not help the people being deprived. Either because the government is too poor to, it is not one of the things the government is looking into, or the government does not know or care. Because of this certain people, or even whole populations are denied human rights and their living conditions and way of life are usually not on the positive side of things. There are many wealthier countries trying to help but sometimes that is not enough. To what extent should Canada have a role in working to increase human rights protection in other nations?
When the topic of hate and bias crime legislation is brought up two justifications commonly come to mind. In her article entitled “Why Liberals Should Hate ‘Hate Crime Legislation” author Heidi M. Hurd discusses the courts and states views that those who commit hate and bias crimes ought to be more severely punished. She takes into consideration both sides of the argument to determine the validity of each but ultimately ends the article in hopes to have persuaded the reader into understanding and agreeing with her view that laws concerning the punishment of hate and bias laws should not be codified. Hate crime is described as a violent, prejudice crime that occurs when a victim is targeted because of their membership in a specific group. The types of crime can vary from physical assault, vandalism, harassment or hate speech. Throughout the article Hurd tried to defend her view and explain why there should be no difference of punishment for similar crimes no matter the reason behind it. Her reason behind her article came from the law that President Obama signed in 2009 declaring that crimes committed with hatred or prejudice should have more sever punishments. While the court has their own views to justify their reasoning behind such decisions, in the article Hurd brings up points and facts to prove the wrongfulness of creating such a law. However, though Hurd has made her views clear in the following essay I will discuss reasons why the penalties are justifiable, why they should receive the same degree of punishment, less punishment and my personal view on the topic.
Welsh, B., & Irving, M. (2005). Crime and punishment in Canada, 1981-1999. Crime and Justice, 33, 247-294. Retrieved from http://library.mtroyal.ca:2063/stable/3488337?&Search=yes&searchText=canada&searchText=crime&list=hide&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dcrime%2Bin%2Bcanada%26acc%3Don%26wc%3Don&prevSearch=&item=18&ttl=33894&returnArticleService=showFullText
Lieberman M, Larner J. “Hate crime laws: punishment to fit the crime. Dissent”. 2010;(3):81. Available from: Academic OneFile, Ipswich, MA. Accessed April 1, 2014.
Toronto, Canada: Canadian Scholars' Press, 2000. 167-186. The 'Secondary' of the 'Secon Ogawa, Brian K. Color of Justice: Culturally Sensitive Treatment of Minority Crime Victims. Allen and Bacon: Needham Heights, MA, 1999. Saleh Hanna, Viviane.