The Parliament of Canada’s ParlVU event centre will be broadcasting the second hour of debate on Bill C-304 this evening (February 14th, 2012) at 5:30pm.
Bill C-304 will strip the censorship powers from the fanatical Canadian Human Rights Commission and repeal Section 13 of the human Rights Act. Section 13 is Canada’s shameful internet censorship legislation, which has been used to gag and harass close to a hundred Canadians. Section 13 has a 100% conviction rate, and allows for no defences. Hearings are lengthy and biased against the accused, which has caused many newspapers and columnists to dub the Human Rights Tribunal “a kangaroo court.”
Parliament’s Projected Order of Business for February 14th, 2012 shows:
PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS
C-304 — Mr. Storseth (Westlock—St. Paul) — An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act (protecting freedom) — Second reading (resuming debate)
Length of speeches, pursuant to Standing Order 95(1):
· Member moving motion — 15 minutes maximum and the speech is subject to a 5-minute question and comment period.
· All other Members — 10 minutes maximum.
Voting — at the expiry of the time provided for debate, pursuant to Standing Order 93(1).
You can watch the debate live on ParlVU here:
Background on Section 13
Sections 13 and 54 of the Canadian Human Rights Act are a direct attack on the freedom of expression guaranteed to us under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The provisions of these sections allow the Canadian Human Rights Commission to prosecute anyone alleged to have said or written something “likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt” whether there is an actual victim or not.
Vague concepts such as speech or writing “likely to cause hatred or contempt” are the basis of expensive state-funded prosecution of individuals. The statute provides no objective legal test for “hate” or any objective means of determining what constitutes “contempt”. As a result, the CHRC is used by various groups and individuals, as a risk-free taxpayer funded method to silence their critics and those they disagree with. CHRC investigators have testified that that “freedom of speech is an American concept” and therefore not valid in Canada. Such statements are contrary to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but are standard operating procedure for the extremists at the CHRC.
Commissioners of the Canadians Human Rights Tribunal, who are not judges and are often not even lawyers, have held that “truth” is not a defence against prosecution under Section 13. In fact, if you argue the truth of your statements, it is then used as proof of your guilt, and a rational to increase the amount of fines! Intent or fair comment are also not defenses. In fact, there is not a single listed defence under Section 13! Because of the lack of any defenses, the Tribunal has a 98% conviction rate since 1978. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal routinely ignores the principles of fundamental justice, such as the rules of evidence, and these kangaroo courts, even allow hearsay evidence.
On September 2, 2009 the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal found in the Lemire case that Section 13 was unconstitutional and in violation of the Charter. In the decision the Tribunal slammed the CHRC for being aggressive and confrontational. In 2008, the CHRC’s own hand-picked expert – Richard Moon of the University of Windsor – wrote a substantial report on Section 13 with his main recommendation being to repeal it.
Every journalist, writer, Internet webmaster, publisher and private citizen in Canada can be the subject of a Human Rights complaint for expressing an opinion or telling the truth. Given the ambiguity of Section 13, it is virtually impossible for any individual to determine if they might be in violation of Section 13. Arbitrary censorship and punishment are wrong, and cannot be justified in a free society.
Support Freedom of Speech
Section 13 and 54 of the Canadian ‘Human Rights’ Act is shameful censorship!