OTTAWA, Ontario, September 2, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal ruled today that section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, Canada’s human rights legislation against hate messages, unreasonably limits the Charter right to freedom of expression…

The hate message section of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) has been the subject of growing criticism, having been accused of placing limits on the Charter right to freedom of expression.  High profile cases have been brought against conservative publisher Ezra Levant and columnist Mark Steyn, as well as numerous cases against Christians who have expressed their convictions against the homosexualist agenda.

The CHRC has admitted to using unethical methods within their investigations.  Notably, in a hearing during Lemire’s case, CHRC employee Dean Steacy testified that he and a number of colleagues regularly used an alias to post racist messages on radical “far-right” websites.  The CHRC was also investigated by the RCMP regarding allegations that they had hacked into a private citizen’s internet connection, though that case was dropped when it led the police to the American jurisdiction…

While bound by the 1990 Supreme Court decision which upheld section 13, CHRC v. Taylor, Hadjis observed that that decision was made “on the belief that the process itself was not only structured, but actually functioned in as conciliatory a manner as possible.”  According to him, the Supreme Court decision “hinged on the absence of any penal provision akin to the one now found at s. 54(1)(c),” which is the clause that allows the Tribunal to impose fines of up to $10,000…

For these reasons, he said, “I have…concluded that s. 13(1) in conjunction with ss. 54(1) and (1.1) are inconsistent with s. 2(b) of the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression.

“The restriction imposed by these provisions is not a reasonable limit within the meaning of s. 1 of the Charter.”

Hadjis said that because the Tribunal is not capable of actually repealing section 13, “I will simply refuse to apply these provisions for the purposes of the complaint against Mr. Lemire and I will not issue any remedial order against him.”…

More… (source)

Advertisements