Friday, June 11, 2010

SECTION 13 SERIES: Discrimination in the name of "Human Rights" - Section 13 targets one race exclusively

Here is part two in the Section 13 Exposed! series.

Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, is Canada’s shameful internet censorship legislation, where truth is no defence, intent is no defence, in fact, there are zero defences! Recently in the Lemire case, Section 13 has been found to be unconstitutional.  The censorship enforcers appealed to the Federal Court of Canada.

These articles on Section 13 will document all the different angles of Internet censorship and the threat it poses to freedom and liberty in Canada.

Canada’s needs freedom of speech on the Internet, and the fanatical CHRC wants to silence thought and speech.  To date, they have spent millions to keep their censorship franchise running.  With the most recent ruling by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to stop all enforcement of Section 13 – Marc Lemire’s case is the only active Section 13 case in all of Canada!  Unfortunately, all the weight of the state censors will be brought to bear.

Please send what you can to assist in the Lemire case.   The Lemire case will be the definitive challenge to internet censorship.  Your help is desperately needed.


NO SURRENDER!

-Marc Lemire






Part #2


SECTION 13:



Discrimination in the name of “Human Rights”
 Section 13 targets one race exclusively


The Canadian Human Right Act was drafted and remains, apart from section 13, a statute addressing discrimination in housing, employment, and goods and services on various prohibited grounds. The Human Rights Act defines discriminatory practices related to the provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodations (ss. 5, 14), the provision of commercial premises or residential accommodation (ss. 6, 14), hiring and employment practices (ss. 7,8,9,10,11, 12, 14), and retaliation against a complainant under the Act.

These provisions relate to the ability of a person to survive in society, to eat, to find a place to live, to find employment and a means of making a living. The retaliation provision is an attempt to protect those seeking a remedy under the statute. Section 13, however, does not relate to these fundamental means of surviving and earning a living in Canadian society.

A review of the case law conclusively shows that Section 13 is used to target individuals.  Of the complaints actually sent to a Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (CHRT) hearing, virtually no non-section 13 decisions in the years 2006 and 2007 were made which involved a respondent who was an individual.  In 2007, for example, the CHRT website lists 59 rulings and decisions made in that year. In non-section 13 cases, respondents included the Treasury Board of Canada, the Canadian Forces, Canada Post Corporation, Air Canada and Canadian National Railway.

When section 13 complaints alone are examined, however, the situation is exactly the opposite. Virtually all respondents, that were legally persons, were individuals or small associated groups of individuals.

As a practical matter, the discriminatory practices set out in the statute, other than section 13, will involve an individual or class of individuals who feel aggrieved against a federally regulated employer or service provider.  Of necessity, the respondent will be, and almost always is, a corporation or a government agency or department or a band under federal jurisdiction.

Under these provisions, the respondent is an entity who has allegedly discriminated against an individual or class of individuals in the provision of employment or services. But under section 13, the respondent is not providing any service or employment. He or she is someone who has used the federally regulated telecommunications facility, in a manner which is allegedly contrary to the statute. While corporations are obviously subject to section 13, not one corporation or federal agency or department has ever been the subject of a decision of the CHRT in the over thirty year history of the provision.

In the other discriminatory practices, an employer or service provider is the person being held liable. In section 13, it is the ordinary person, not in business and not a tax-funded government department or agency, who is being held liable.

The very definitions of discriminatory acts set out in the statute, other than section 13, ensure that in practice only those persons aggrieved by certain acts or policies will lay complaints. Such persons, because they have suffered harm, are looking for remedies to the situation in the fastest and most efficient manner possible. Conciliation and mediation are therefore welcome procedures that can be and are used by complainants under these provisions.

In the chart, Total CHRC Decisions (2002-2006), data from the CHRC 2006 Annual Report [1] shows that the remedial procedures set out in the statute appear to work well in resolving complaints.  Only 11% of the total complaints filed for those years were unresolved and were sent to a hearing before the CHRT.

[Click on picture to enlarge]

When complaints filed under section 13 alone are looked at, however, the situation is exactly the opposite.  In the chart “Section 13 CHRC Decisions 1978 – 2007,” it can be seen that fully 68% of complaints were sent on to a CHRT hearing. Only 4% were settled.  Once complaints are sent to the CHRT, complaints under section 13 again are resolved in a manner strikingly different from non-section 13 complaints. 

[Click on picture to enlarge]

The chart “Mediated Cases before the CHRT,” sets out the percentages of complaints resolved through mediation once they have been forwarded to the CHRT. In 2004, fully 67% of all complaints sent to the CHRT were settled through mediation. In 2005, this figure rose to 73.5% and in 2006 to 86% of complaints. Of section 13 complaints alone, however, only 10% of cases were settled through mediation at the CHRT in its entire thirty-two years history!  In the ultimate resolution of cases, all individuals who have been before the tribunal have been found liable under section 13.

[Click on picture to enlarge]

Section 13 is clearly different from all other discriminatory practices under the CHRA. It is different with respect to the persons who are the subject of complaints and it is different in the way complaints are processed and resolved. The differences are not minor. In every way, section 13 complaints are the mirror image of non-section 13 complaints, to the detriment of respondents and the effect on freedom of speech.

[Click on picture to enlarge]
 ------------------


[Click on picture to enlarge]
-----------------------


[Click on picture to enlarge]



Section 13: Used to target one group only

A 2007 Access to Information request filed by Marc Lemire, shows that since the inception of the Human Rights Act (to 2007), the CHRC has investigated 100 complaints under Section 13. Of those; the CHRC sent an overwhelming 68% of them on to a hearing before the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal.

[Click on picture to enlarge]

As odd as it sounds, the Canadian Human Rights Commission is just like a typical third-world government agency. Their files are in such disarray they don’t actually know how many Section 13 complaints they have even received.[2] In 2007, the number of 100 referred to in Lemire’s Access request is largely a guess on how many have been received. 

A lawyer representing the CHRC in the Lemire hearings, stated on the record:

MS. BLIGHT (CHRC Lawyer): Mr. Chairman, may I add for the record that I am familiar with this as counsel for the Commission, and I can advise Ms. Kulaszka and yourself that the number of 100 was based on the Commission's electronic recordkeeping system, and the Commission is not, in fact, able to conclusively confirm the accuracy of that number but it is the best number that the Commission has been able to produce based upon the records that it has at this time.[3]

The number of 68% of all Section 13 cases being sent to the Tribunal is in stark contrast to the rest of the Canadian Human Rights Act.   In all other (non-Section 13) cases, only a mere 11% are sent on to a Tribunal hearing.[4] 

A comprehensive review of all complaints the CHRC have dealt with, shows the agency only targets and sends on to the Tribunal a certain racial class of “offenders”.  100% of cases have whites as respondents.

The statistics speak volumes:

·        ONLY ONE respondent have ever won a section 13 case before the tribunal.
·        100% of cases have Whites as respondents 
·        98% of cases have poor or working class respondents 
·        90.7% of respondents are not represented by lawyers
·        To date, $93,000 has been awarded in fines and special compensation since 2003.
·        37 respondents have lifetime speech bans (Cease and Desist) orders and if not followed the victims could face up to 5 years in prison.
·        72.4% of complaints specifically identify "jews" as victims.
·        48.8% of all cases are by Richard Warman (all but 3 cases since 2002)


[Click on picture to enlarge]


Is Section 13 Censorship really needed?

From 2002 to present, the law has been almost exclusively used by a single former employee of the Canadian Human Rights Commission





Further reading on Section 13:


  • Marc Lemire’s constitutional challenge of Section 13
  • The Marc Lemire case:  A battle for freedom of speech
  • Political Strategy to Repeal Section 13: Spearheaded by Liberal MP Dr. Keith Martin with Bill M-446 (An act to repeal Section 13) Support has been overwhelming from the media, opinion journalists and Canadians.  At present, two separate House of Commons Sub-Committee's are currently investigating the out-of-control "Human Rights" Commissions.
  • Victims of Section 13: Writers, webmasters, magazines, Christians, the entire list of victims. From the very first - John Ross Taylor, to the latest victims including Macleans Magazine, Catholic Insight Magazine, FreeDominion, Marc Lemire, Melissa Guille and many others.
  • Books and Videos on Section 13:  Booklets on CHRC censorship, the constitutional challenge, Debunking Hate Laws, internet censorship and much much more.
  • Support the legal challenge of Section 13: The hardest fight is the legal one.  The legal team challenging Section 13 needs your help to continue.  Please click on this link and donate.  Your Donations = OUR Survival!
  • The FreedomSite Blog: Documenting the chilling effects of Censorship and repression of the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The blog is run by Marc Lemire, webmaster of the Freedomsite
  • Canadian Human Rights Commission EXPOSED! Exposing the Misnamed “Human Rights” Commissions in Canada. They are the single largest threat to freedom of speech in Canada. The Ottawa Citizen has called them a “Kangaroo Court” and “Star Chamber”. It’s time to abolish both the Canadian “Human Rights” Commission and the Canadian “Human Rights” Tribunal







-----------------------------------------
I Desperately need your help to continue


Fighting the fanatics at the Canadian "Human Rights" Commission and defending freedom of speech for ALL Canadians is not an easy task. In particular, the Federal Court of Canada challenge to defeat Canada’s internet censorship legislation, has consumed an immense amount of time and resources. 
This has meant sacrificing a lot of cherished things in my life that I used to take for granted such as spending precious time with my wonderful children. It's also very costly and has incurred heavy debts given that I'm facing a "Human Rights" juggernaut that has a limitless budget. It has already spent millions and is prepared to spend a lot more of your tax dollars to keep their thought control machine running.

My courageous lawyer Barbara Kulaszka and myself have demonstrated what two dedicated researchers can accomplish against overwhelming odds. We have single-handedly and doggedly fought the system and exposed the corrupt underbelly of the "Human Rights" Commission's fanatics. Nothing ever comes easy when you are fighting such a racket. This case is a seminal one, where the outcome will have serious implications on our right to think and speak freely in this country for generations to come. All Canadians will benefit if we manage to get this shameful law expunged from our legal books.

Every victory we've attained against the "Human Rights" juggernaut has come at great expense. Nothing has come easy.  In fact, the “Human Rights” Commission has done everything in their power to stop exposure of their twisted censorship agenda.

I cannot carry on this important fight alone. Your donations literally equal the survival of this case. I wish to thank all those that have donated to this worthy cause. Please donate directly to us so that I can send out a personal thank you. If you have donated to another organization or individual please contact me so I can thank you directly and send you a copy of our special booklet that is for our supporters only.



How you can help:



Support Marc Lemire's Constitutional Challenge

Be part of the Freedom team and contribute what you can to defeat this horrible law 
and protect Freedom of Speech in Canada !
 
·         Via Mail: Send Cheque or Money Order to:

Marc Lemire
152 Carlton Street 
PO Box 92545 
Toronto, Ontario 
M5A 2K1 
Canada




It’s time to end the censorship of the extremist Canadian Human Rights Commission!
 
Stop Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act
 
 




[1] 2006 CHRC Annual Report – Page 21
[2] Access to Information Request filed by Marc Lemire with the Canadian Human Rights Commission.  Dated June 12, 2007.  *Note that the CHRC has admitted to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal that they are not conclusively sure exactly how many complaints have been received, but this is their best guess. [Lemire CHRT Transcripts – Volume 24, Page 5266 – 5267]
[3] Lemire CHRC Transcripts. Volume: 24, Page: 5266-5267
[4] 2006 Canadian Human Rights Commission Annual Report – Page 21