by Merv Ritchie
2nd September 2009
This morning a new light shines across Canada. The Canadian Human
Rights Tribunal (CHRT) has had its fangs trimmed. Section 13, the law
that prohibits speaking openly about uncomfortable truths has finally
been defeated. Commonly referred to as the anti hate law it has been
used to stifle criticism of policy and ideology on almost every
medium. The first use of the law was to force a man, John Ross Taylor,
to stop using his own personal telephone answering machine to leave
messages for people that wanted to call in and hear what he had to
say. Generally his thoughts were against Canada’s immigration laws.
The latest use of the law was to charge a man, Marc Lemire, who ran an
internet chat forum. Although he did not approve postings to the
message board (it was an open message forum) he was held to account
for what others posted.
A BC website (operated by a former Kitimat native) is also currently
under indictment by the CHRT for criticizing an ultra right wing
faction of Israeli/Jewish politics called Zionists. Many do not like
Arthur Topham's blunt, unorthodox, politically incorrect writings on
his website, Radicalpress.com, however he provides evidence and
background to back up everything he writes. Truth is not a defence
against the CHRT as every person and organization that has come under
their radar has discovered, as they all were convicted. That is a 100
percent prosecutorial success rate, a rate unheard of anywhere in the
world except in this secretive organization that has recently been
investigated by the RCMP.
In his decision Athanasios D. Hadjis set a very high bar for new
prosecutions under this act. Only the most vile and alarmist writings
should be considered for prosecutions and the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms protects Canadians, allows Canadians, to discuss issues that
are not politically correct. The conclusion is as follows;
V. CONCLUSION
I have determined that Mr. Lemire contravened s. 13 of the Act in only
one of the instances alleged by Mr. Warman, namely the AIDS Secrets
article. However, I have also 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. Since a
formal declaration of invalidity is not a remedy available to the
Tribunal (see Cuddy Chicks Ltd. V. Ontario (Labour Relations Board),
[1991] 2 S.C.R. 5), 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 (see Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation
Board) v. Martin, 2003 SCC 54 at paras. 26-7).
His comments on the AIDS Secret article in part are as follows;
In my view, the material found in the AIDS Secrets article expresses
unusually strong and deep-felt emotions of detestation and
vilification towards homosexuals in particular. The article is rife
with hyperbole and moral condemnation. Homosexuals, and Blacks to a
lesser extent, are denigrated as purveyors of a "killer" that is on
the loose, agonizingly destroying the lives of American children and
adults alike. Extreme language is used to vilify them and their
lifestyles. They are portrayed as a powerful force that is conspiring
to bring harm to others. Rather than using the statistics and studies
in a dispassionately scientific manner, the article adopts an
alarmist, almost hysteric tone, which along the above mentioned
characterizations, is likely to expose them to hatred or contempt.
This is a very dramatic shift in the manner in which Canadians might
discuss issues. It allows for a much greater freedom to engage in
discussions. It also has very profound impacts on internet websites
and forums.
Although Mr. Lemire did not compose the AIDS Secrets article he
allowed it to be posted on his website and therefore was found
responsible for distributing this material.
The conclusion found Section 13 to be at odds with the Charter of
Rights. The next few weeks and months will determine the future of the
CHRT. It has caused much grief for many individuals who wanted to
expose some knowledge they discovered to the general public. Today a
fresh wind of freedom to speak out has blown across Canada.
2nd September 2009
This morning a new light shines across Canada. The Canadian Human
Rights Tribunal (CHRT) has had its fangs trimmed. Section 13, the law
that prohibits speaking openly about uncomfortable truths has finally
been defeated. Commonly referred to as the anti hate law it has been
used to stifle criticism of policy and ideology on almost every
medium. The first use of the law was to force a man, John Ross Taylor,
to stop using his own personal telephone answering machine to leave
messages for people that wanted to call in and hear what he had to
say. Generally his thoughts were against Canada’s immigration laws.
The latest use of the law was to charge a man, Marc Lemire, who ran an
internet chat forum. Although he did not approve postings to the
message board (it was an open message forum) he was held to account
for what others posted.
A BC website (operated by a former Kitimat native) is also currently
under indictment by the CHRT for criticizing an ultra right wing
faction of Israeli/Jewish politics called Zionists. Many do not like
Arthur Topham's blunt, unorthodox, politically incorrect writings on
his website, Radicalpress.com, however he provides evidence and
background to back up everything he writes. Truth is not a defence
against the CHRT as every person and organization that has come under
their radar has discovered, as they all were convicted. That is a 100
percent prosecutorial success rate, a rate unheard of anywhere in the
world except in this secretive organization that has recently been
investigated by the RCMP.
In his decision Athanasios D. Hadjis set a very high bar for new
prosecutions under this act. Only the most vile and alarmist writings
should be considered for prosecutions and the Charter of Rights and
Freedoms protects Canadians, allows Canadians, to discuss issues that
are not politically correct. The conclusion is as follows;
V. CONCLUSION
I have determined that Mr. Lemire contravened s. 13 of the Act in only
one of the instances alleged by Mr. Warman, namely the AIDS Secrets
article. However, I have also 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. Since a
formal declaration of invalidity is not a remedy available to the
Tribunal (see Cuddy Chicks Ltd. V. Ontario (Labour Relations Board),
[1991] 2 S.C.R. 5), 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 (see Nova Scotia (Workers' Compensation
Board) v. Martin, 2003 SCC 54 at paras. 26-7).
His comments on the AIDS Secret article in part are as follows;
In my view, the material found in the AIDS Secrets article expresses
unusually strong and deep-felt emotions of detestation and
vilification towards homosexuals in particular. The article is rife
with hyperbole and moral condemnation. Homosexuals, and Blacks to a
lesser extent, are denigrated as purveyors of a "killer" that is on
the loose, agonizingly destroying the lives of American children and
adults alike. Extreme language is used to vilify them and their
lifestyles. They are portrayed as a powerful force that is conspiring
to bring harm to others. Rather than using the statistics and studies
in a dispassionately scientific manner, the article adopts an
alarmist, almost hysteric tone, which along the above mentioned
characterizations, is likely to expose them to hatred or contempt.
This is a very dramatic shift in the manner in which Canadians might
discuss issues. It allows for a much greater freedom to engage in
discussions. It also has very profound impacts on internet websites
and forums.
Although Mr. Lemire did not compose the AIDS Secrets article he
allowed it to be posted on his website and therefore was found
responsible for distributing this material.
The conclusion found Section 13 to be at odds with the Charter of
Rights. The next few weeks and months will determine the future of the
CHRT. It has caused much grief for many individuals who wanted to
expose some knowledge they discovered to the general public. Today a
fresh wind of freedom to speak out has blown across Canada.
