Speech notes

- CIC lawyer Faisal Joseph is fuming about the CHRC's decision not to proceed with a complaint against Maclean's:

"We are disappointed that the Tribunal made this decision without hearing the compelling evidence of hate and the expert testimony we recently presented to the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal," said Joseph. "The Commission's decision contradicts the findings of its own Investigator's report which states that this Article contains hallmarks of hate identified by the Commission in its earlier case law," continued Joseph... [actually, the paragraphs cited in the CIC's own press release say the article may contain such elements, and that "an argument could be made" to that effect - DP]

[...]

"The Commission's decision also contradicts the recent statement of the Ontario Human Rights Commission where it found this Article to be an explicit expression of Islamophobia," Joseph noted. "We now have two different Tribunals, neither of which had the complete evidence presented to the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, making contradictory findings."

"My clients will take some time to determine whether we will apply to the Federal Court for a review of the Commission's decision or whether we are satisfied with the opportunity we had to present our case to the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal," Joseph concluded.

Steyn has said he'd be fine with this matter being brought before an actual court - which, among other powers, could order costs against one of the parties - and I certainly wouldn't mind seeing more clarity brought to this issue. In any event, if the BCHRT rules against Maclean's, the matter will almost certainly be appealed (albeit to the Supreme Court of British Columbia, not the Federal Court, though both matters could eventially make it to the Supreme Court of Canada). Joseph and the CIC should be careful what they wish for.

- Ezra Levant is very happy with the SCC decision on defamation and fair comment, but Deborah Gyapong worries that the decision is another sign of "open season on Christians":

...Anything said about conservative evangelicals or Catholics is "fair comment" no matter how defamatory, libelous, or egregious. Shoot, Dan Brown's "hate screed" The DaVinci Code was a mega bestselling book.

But say similar things--even if true-- about any other group and, well, all of a sudden, fair comment morphs into hate speech. I wonder what the decision would have been had Kari Simpson been sued by, say, a gay activist. We'll see what happens when Stephen Boissoin's case gets appealed. Some groups are more equal than others before the law.

Now maybe the principles in this case will be uniformly applied, and the bloggers being sued by Richard Warman will find this decision helpful. I hope Ezra is right to be optimistic that the highest court is upholding a broader notion of freedom of speech. But if that broader notion of free speech is only one-sided, giving the wholesale right to lie about Christians, demean us, dehumanize us, while making it increasingly illegal for us to defend our faith and moral principles in the public square, this decision could further hurt us.

Personally, I think all religious beliefs - Christian, Muslim or otherwise - should be fair game for criticism and satire. Kari Simpson should have the right to speak out against homosexuality, and Rafe Mair should have the right to condemn her for it.

Many people are indeed more sensitive about possibly offending Muslims than offending Christians, either because of Western guilt or simply, old-fashioned fear. I have a real problem with that - but I certainly wouldn't want a situation where Islam can be criticized but Christianity is sacrosanct, either.

- M.J. Murphy at BigCityLib, who is upset about the possibility that government assistance for "offensive" film productions could be revoked, is trying to get government assistance for Maclean's revoked:

But--calculated to offend?--that oughtta be enough to have Macleans' [Publication Assistance Program] subsidy revoked. When Heritage Canada responds to my torrid emails inquiring as to how to launch a complaint, Kenneth Whyte and Mark Steyn and co. will have to start buying their own stamps.

BCL, you keep using that word, "liberal." I do not think it means what you think it means.

Damian P.

Posted by damian at June 29, 2008 07:18 PM