In 1986 Canadian Supreme Court Justice William McIntyre wrote freedom of expression is one of the fundamental concepts that have formed the basis for historical development of western society.
In essence what I believe he was saying was in order for democracy and free society to continue, the right of everyone to express their ideas freely and without fear of persecution was paramount.
In regards to this, I would make reference to the William Whatcott case, a resident of Saskatoon who distributed fliers in Saskatoon, Regina, Calgary and Ottawa. Those fliers apparently stated homosexuality is a sin.
He meant no harm to anyone, but his activities should have been treated as free speech. However, he was summoned before the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal (SHRT) and charged. He was consequently ordered to pay a $17,500 fine and to cease publicly speaking his beliefs about homosexuality. Whatcott disagreed with SHRT’s decision, appealed, and had the case heard by the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench, which upheld the SHRT’s decision. Again he appealed, and the case was next heard by the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal. This court realized the hollowness of the SHRT’s decision and overturned the Court of Queen’s Bench decision.
In my opinion, this should have been the end of the problem, but no, the SHRT was determined to make Canadian taxpayers again importuned, and the case went to the Supreme Court of Canada. The Supreme Court’s recent decision dealt a severe blow to free speech in this country.
The Supreme Court does not distinguish between “hating acts” associated with homosexuality and hating homosexual people, nor does it determine what exactly constitutes detestation and vilification. It appears the court seems to have danced all around the Whatcott case but never clearly stated exactly how he violated the law. Again, the court goes on to say all rights to free speech are guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but then appears to say these rights are subject to “reasonable” limitations.
So, do we have freedom of speech or not?
Well it would appear by their decision we do not enjoy that right.
The Supreme Court rambles on, saying the truth may be used for widely different ends. I must admit that I am somewhat confused by that, and so may be the justices who wrote this. I always thought the truth was the truth!
The Court continues with regards by stating he meant harm to others. However, the Court does not spell out what harm Whatcott meant to inflict on others.
As one crosses this expansive land, we learn where there are attempts to stifle freedom of expression or speech in many areas. The University of Calgary and Simon Fraser University both have attempted to stop students from erecting Pro-Life displays on their campuses. The University of Calgary even made the claim it could do so because as a public institution it was exempt from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. If it is, then why are we paying taxes to support it?
Carleton University and the University of Ottawa have made it extremely difficult for freedom of speech to thrive on their campuses as well. Student unions on many campuses across Canada are controlling what literature students may display or distribute on campus. If any institutions should be the bastions for free speech, it should be universities — our institutions of higher learning.
In Alberta, if one refers to Section 3, Part 1 of the Alberta Human Right Act, (AHRA) which states, “prohibits any statement that indicates discrimination or an intention to discriminate based on the grounds protected by the Act”. Where does this leave free speech?
I would submit there are four valid reasons why all Human Rights Commissions across Canada should be abolished: Our freedoms are threatened; Human Rights Commissions are not real courts; Human Rights Commissions are biased in favour of complainants and against defendants; and as a defendant, it is nearly impossible to win, and even if one does win a case, the costs incurred are almost impossible for most people to cover.
We have real courts and although they maybe clogged these judicial bodies are fair to both parties in a dispute. Here again the defendant must be treated as fairly as the complainant.
It is time that the Alberta Government severely remodeled the Human Rights Commission and removed Section 3 entirely or perhaps abolished the whole Human Rights Act altogether.
Freedom of Expression, however idiotic, repulsive and unintelligent it may on occasion appear to be, must be restored to all Canadians in order for our democracy to be preserved and grow.
