Sunday, January 11, 2009
2008 was bad for free speech--'09 promises better, by Rob Breakenridge, for The Calgary Herald
The year 2008 will be remembered for many reasons, but was certainly one in which the issue of freedom of speech came into the forefront. And as this tumultuous year draws to a close, we've been offered two further examples of why this issue has become so galvanizing and at the same time so surreal.
The first came earlier this month--an early Christmas present of sorts for someone who would probably cringe at the notion of such a gesture.
The Canadian Human Rights Commission informed Quebec Resident Marc Lebuis that his complaint against the writings of Montreal Imam Abou Hammaad Sulaiman Dameus Al-Hayiti would not proceed.
Some of the passages highlighted in the complaint include references to Jews as spreading "corruption and chaos on Earth" and seeking "only mate-rial goods and money" because, otherwise, "they have nothing."
The language used to describe homosexuals was even more aggressive--the imam accuses gays and lesbians of spreading "disorder on Earth." He says homosexuals should be "exterminated in this life," and any gay men caught in a sexual act should be beheaded.
In rejecting the complaint, a CHRC representative claimed "the extracts . . . do not seem to promote "hatred" or "contempt" according to the criteria set forth in the Taylor case" --a reference to 1990 Supreme Court decision narrowly upholding Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act.
That case has been referenced many times in rulings from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, so the decision to let this imam off the hook seems puzzling in that light.
For example, a 2006 tribunal decision against Glenn Bahr repeatedly cites the Taylor verdict, using it as a means to help establish the meaning of "hatred" and "contempt."
The ruling refers to anti-Semitic comments in which "Jews as a group are described as unscrupulous, deceptive, dishonest and immoral" and concludes such comments are "likely to evoke extreme ill will against Jewish persons."
It also refers to comments advocating extermination of homosexuals, which constitute "a complete denial that (homosexuals) might have redeeming qualities and is an expression of 'extreme ill will.' "
It's hard to see how the imam's writings do not fall under the same criteria used to convict others. Moreover, this case involves not some obscure nobody writing on some obscure Internet message board--we're talking about the writings of a figure of religious authority. One might also note it's the same city where Jewish community centres have been attacked.
Section 13 and it's provincial cousins are bad enough as they are, but it becomes even worse when it appears as though some individuals are exempt -- a licence to hate, if you will.
As we've seen repeatedly this year--from Ezra Levant to Mark Steyn to comedian Guy Earle--there are many who are very clearly not exempt from the reach of federal and provincial human rights commissions.
That would include the conservative website Free Dominion, which has been under investigation for several months now by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The CHRC interest in Free Dominion goes back even further: a complaint filed against the site in September of 2006 was later withdrawn.
The operators of Free Dominion, Mark and Connie Fournier, filed an Access to Information request to try and shine some light on why and how they were being investigated.
A few days ago they got their response--23 pages of heavily redacted documents, save the names of more than a dozen CHRC employees working on the file, and the pleasantries exchanged as they e-mail back and forth about the case.
It presents a most glaring contrast--the CHRC would appear to be going out its way to not investigate a fanatical anti-gay, anti-Jewish imam, but seems to be going out of its way to investigate a conservative political website.
It's a fitting way to wrap up what's been a roller-coaster of a year filled with setbacks and victories for freedom of speech.
As we go forward into 2009, though, we bring with us a broad consensus behind the argument that Canadian law needs to be changed to protect freedom of speech. That consensus now includes politicians on both the left and right, meaning the change we need may just be the change we get.
If 2009 is going to bring us any news worth celebrating, this is where we may find it.
Rob Breakenridge hosts the World Tonight, Weeknights 6:30 p. m. to 9 p. m. on AM770 CHQR.
Link
Labels: Canada, Freedom of expression, Islam, Religion and fanaticism
# posted by Francis Chartrand @ 11:02 PM 
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]