Canada and UN march down opposite roads on Hate Speech

November 25, 2008

How ironic that on the same day the UN entered the dark ages, a review concluded that the hate-speech provision should be dropped in the Canadian Human Rights Act and that incitement to violence ought to be dealt strictly as a criminal - rather then a government Inquisitional - matter.

First, the bad news, from today's National Post:

"Combating Defamation of Religions passed 85 -50 with 42 abstentions in a key UN General Assembly committee, and will enter into the international record after an expected rubber stamp by the plenary later in the year."

But the silver lining may be the Canadian public backlash that may fuel the fire towards eradicating our own blashemphy law. Consider the following excerpt:

"But in an irony given Canada's stance, an anti-blasphemy law remains in the Criminal Code. Experts point out it has not been used for a prosecution in more than 70 years."

Prophetically, today also marks the release of an independent review - the Moon Review - of the Canadian Human Rights Act. The recommendation: remove Section 13, which prohibits contempt or hatred to identifiable groups, whether likely to lead to violence or not, but which has been of late interpreted to include possibly offensive or derogatory words and pictures. Disturbingly,

'The current legal test for violations of Section 13 is whether messages were "likely to expose" identifiable groups to "hatred or contempt." As it is now, neither truth nor intent is a defence, as they can be in libel law. Prof. Moon recommended that intent to advocate or justify violence be made a requirement for Section 13, replacing the test of "likely to expose."'